Author: Salman Rafi Sheikh

US is Losing its Geo-Political Edge in Asia!

Ex: http://journal-neo.org

The US  ambitious “pivot” to Asia is not working the way it would have wanted it to. Not only is is facing strong competition and resistance from potential ‘enemy’ states, but its own so-called ‘allies’ have also started to become a source of trouble rather than comfort. In his latest visit to Asia, President Obama failed to secure the US’ vital objectives which were otherwise of crucial significance for strengthening his ties with its erstwhile ‘allies’ in South and East Asia, especially in the wake of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and geo-political upheavals in Europe (Ukraine crisis) and the Middle East. Timing of the tour, in the wake of these crucial geo-political circumstances, was therefore of critical significance. And the tour, if it had been ‘successful’, would have helped the US in tightening geo-strategic circle around China and Russia. The US’ “Asia Pivot”, which is supposed to run parallel to the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, stumbled across a number of serious setbacks when President Obama failed to secure certain vital deals with its ‘key’ allies in South-East Asia.

Apart from issuing statements of solidarity, the visit did not bring forth any meaningful advance for the US. President Obama had hoped to use his visit to sign a trade agreement with Japan which would otherwise have been a critical step towards the strengthening of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but the agreement really had no chance because of a stiff resistance from within Japan, and the local government’s failure to convince its public of the ‘utility’ of such an agreement.

This fact is a sound enough indication of the fact that people are gradually becoming aware of the way the US exploits inter-state disputes to further its own hegemonic agenda. This fact became clear when President Obama had to mention, in his attempts to elicit a positive response from Japan on finalizing the trade agreement, Japan’s confrontation with China over a clump of Islands in East China. This is not the first time the US has deliberately tried to intensify inter-state tensions in the region. For example, during Hagel’s last trip to Japan and China, he drew a direct, but yet unnatural, parallel between Crimea’s legal annexation with Russia’s case in Crimea and China’s territorial disputes with its neighbours in the East and the South China Sea. His attempts were aimed at paving the way for President’s visit to Japan by provoking an artificial environment of hostility between China and Japan.

However, the net result of this tour of President Obama, and that of earlier tours, has been an alliance clearly on a weaker footing than it was earlier and very much vulnerable to geo-political frailties. Announcing the failure to finalize and sign the agreement, Akira Amari, a Japanese state minister in charge of the trade talks for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s administration, said in Tokyo that “several issues” between the US and Japan were still unresolved.“We made significant progress, but our positions are still far apart,” Amari told reporters.

It would be a mistake to interpret these “several issues” as merely economical. The disagreement has a lot to do with Japan’s resurgence in the Pacific, and attempts to reduce dependence on the US. It must be taken into account that Abe’s government in Japan has increased the Japanese military budget for the first time in a decade, established a US-style national security council, re-oriented military strategy to the country’s southern island chain opposite the Chinese mainland, and begun to revive the Japan’s military power, which has a real problem for the US; for, it will not only reduce Japan’s dependence over the US, but also cause a serious cut in the US’ military presence in the region. It is for this reason that the US, previewing Japan’s reluctance to host a huge number of the US forces in future, has been attempting to secure new deals with weaker states, such as the Philippines, to increase its military presence there

Thus the original purpose of this agreement is to keep Japan dependent upon the US for both economic and military agendas. As a former US national security adviser, Tom Donilon, wrote in Washington Post, the Trans-Pacific agreement is actually meant to solidify the US leadership in Asia and to put the US “at the center of a project” that would “govern the global economy for the next century.” But, contrary to the US ambitions, Abe’s government is trying to exploit the opportunity to remilitarize and mount its own diplomatic offensive in South East Asia.

The US failure to achieve its objectives in Asia becomes more even more obvious when we look at the fast expanding military power of China, which did not push the regional allied states. In other words, China’s growing power, both economic and military, is itself fast becoming a factor pushing the US to its limits in Asia. Although the US naval supremacy is, generally speaking, still intact in the Pacific, China’s aggressive military expansion over the past two decades — its defense budget grew more than 12 percent this year alone — calls into question the long-term balance of powers in the Pacific. In last year alone, China commissioned 17 new warships, more than any other state in the whole world. It also aims to have four aircraft carriers by 2020 and has already developed a considerable fleet of nuclear submarines. In the next few decades, China’s ability to project naval power will extend deep into the South Pacific and Indian Oceans.

Do the East Asian states still consider China as an ‘enemy’ state, while the relations between them continue to stay far from what one could call  ”friendly”? If this is not true, then why the US’ ‘democratic’ allies facing more and more obstacles in signing local military and economic agreements? The underline cause must be the growing trade relations between some of local states and China. For example, an annual trade between India and China reached a record $ 74 billion in 2011, when China became India’s largest trading partner. Similarly, by 2015, bilateral trading between China and the ASEAN, will doubled, growing from $231 billion to $500 billion, that would make China the ASEAN’s biggest trading partner. And, as far as trade relations between China and Japan are concerned, they have been directly trading their currencies, the Yen and the Yuan, on the inter-bank foreign exchange markets in Tokyo and Shanghai in a bid to strengthen bilateral trade and investment between the world’s second- and third-largest economies. Both countries are skipping the dollar in transactions, intend to reduce their dependence on the US dollar and on the US monetary authorities’ influence on the Asian economy. In other words, Japan, an ‘ally’ of the US has directly been aiding China’s goal of undercutting the US influence in the region.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

China’s Presence in Latin America

Nil NIKANDROV
Strategic-Culture.org

China’s Presence in Latin America: Strategy of Gradual Squeezing US Out

The United States keeps on getting mired in the quagmire of Ukraine’s crisis. Meanwhile China is intensifying diplomatic efforts in Latin America. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has just wound up his Latin America trip. He has visited Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina and Brazil. China’s top leader Xi Jinping is to tour the region in July.

Beijing boasts the relations of strategic partnership with Havana, Caracas, Buenos Aires and Brasilia. That’s what Wang Yi talked about while meeting Raul Castro, Nicolas Maduro, Cristina Fernandez and Dilma Rousseff. Without any exaggeration he was greeted with outspread arms. In recent years, China has significantly strengthened its presence in the region. Many of the states situated to the south of Rio Grande see dynamic trade and investments coming from China as an important contribution into reduction of dependence on the United States with its annoying incessant rebukes and off-handed interference telling everybody what to do. Latin Americans want close cooperation with the Celestial Empire, the state which boasts rapid progress and looking confidently into the future to become a world leader in the multipolar world. 

According to plans, the Chairman Xi Jinping’s visit to Brazil will coincide with the announcement of establishing the joint ministerial-level forum with the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), a platform for promoting their comprehensive cooperative partnership, which features equality, mutual benefit and common development, so as to better safeguard their common interests and promote world and regional peace, stability and development. The initiative is unanimously approved by CELAC member-states. The idea of close friendship with China is attractive. The state is nearing a super power status and is involved in hundreds of joint energy, infrastructure, communications, agriculture, science and high-tech projects. The leaders of China, Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador, Costa Rica and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines will be present at the ceremony devoted to the Forum’s establishment. By the end of 2014 the first ministerial China-CELAC working meeting is scheduled to take place. 

The Wan Yi’s visit was mainly focused on practical issues. The special development zone in Mariel, a Cuban port, which is being built with financial support from China, was an issue of special importance. That megaproject under construction 45 km west of Havana is to become a pillar of Cuban development due to the geographic location of the port, remodeled to equip the terminal to receive deeper-draft ships. The project will also attract investment in biotechnology, the pharmaceutical industry, renewable energy, agribusiness, tourism and real estate. Attracting foreign investments is an important contribution into the modernization of the whole country. In Venezuela the parties discussed the diversification of oil and gas sector and the expansion of the welfare program aimed at providing social housing. In Brazil the communications protection of the host country and the states of UNASUR (the Union of South America Nations), especially from interference of US NSA and CIA, was added to the agenda. The Brazil-US relationship has greatly deteriorated following the revelations of Edward Snowden. Washington has never clearly said it was sorry for spying on the country’s leadership, including President Dilma Rousseff. The news about the United States activities made many Brazilians see the reality as it is putting an end to fantasies about equal partnership. 

Many media reported that during his trip Wan Yi discussed the agenda of the sixth summit of BRICS countries with his Brazilian counterpart Brazilian Foreign Minister Luiz Alberto Figueiredo Machado. The group leaders’ meeting is to take place in the Brazilian city of Fortaleza on July 15-17. An announcement of launching a joint development bank with authorized capital stock of $50 billion is expected with great hope. But any signs of constructive steps taken by BRICS are an irritant for the United States. President Obama has failed to establish good relations with the group and Washington has no leverage to influence the organization’s activities. 

The recent example is the United Nations General Assembly’s vote on Crimea in March with four out of five BRICS members abstaining. Every BRICS member has its own reasons not to trust the Obama’s administration expecting it to resort to pressure instead of engaging in a dialogue of equals. 

China has never had any illusions on the account of the North American “partners”. The Asia pivot announced by the United States is seen in China as an attempt to cut it off from the world. South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Malaysia and some other countries are sided with the USA. The recent news from the “anti-China” front is the planned agreement between the United States and the Philippines on US military installations to be deployed in this country for the initial term of 10 years. Of course, China takes appropriate measures in response to boost its defensive potential. 

China believes in the expediency of BRICS expansion to counter the West’s financial dominance implemented with the help of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The group set before itself some strategic goals like gradual distancing for the dollar and creating safe cushions against financial turmoil. China supports the Russia’s approach based on the BRICS “transformation from a dialogue forum into a full-fledged mechanism of strategic interaction.” 

As of December 2013, China was the Latin American third largest trade partner. The trade turnover is on the rise in 2014. China has become the leading consumer of the continent’s minerals causing Washington’s concern. It imports oil, iron, copper, soya and consumer goods. The China’s clout grew significantly as a result of the establishment of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA) in 2004. The organization is a brainchild of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez created to counter the US-led free trade zone concept. 

The US has lost its financial might struggling for world leadership and involved in overseas wars. To large extent China has taken its place… In 2013 the total amount of China’s investments almost reached $17 billion. It has become the leading trade partner of many states in the region, including Brazil. Only in the period of 2005-2011 Latin America received over 75 billion dollars from Chinese banks. Mainly the money was spent on transport, telecommunications, mine industry and energy projects. 

One of the reasons China gives money to Latin American states is to prevent pro-US politicians coming to power. Beijing is interested in preserving social peace in the countries led by left-wing governments. This issue was constantly kept in focus during the Wang Yi’s Latin American tour. Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and some other states are getting more threatened by subversive activities of American special services. The financial support they get from China becomes an important factor of regional stability. 

Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture Foundation on-line journal www.strategic-culture.org.

Author: Ulson Gunnar

A US & Filipino Front Vs. China

Ex: http://journal-neo.org

The reversal of longstanding policy preventing the US from using Filipino territory for military bases signifies and escalation in tensions between the United States and China, as well as exposes the true nature of the US “pivot” toward Asia. 

The Guardian in its article, “Philippines agrees to 10-year pact allowing US military presence,” states that, “the United States and the Philippines have reached a 10-year pact that would allow a larger US military presence in this south-east Asian nation as it grapples with increasingly tense territorial disputes with China, White House officials said on Sunday.” The article would go on to claim that the move seeks to “deter China’s increasingly assertive stance in disputed territories” but that it could “encourage China to intensify its massive military buildup.”  

For many geopolitical analysts, the move comes as no surprise. The “pivot” toward Asia, while promoted as America’s attempt to reengage in the region diplomatically, was in fact nothing more than an attempt for the US to reassert itself as a hegemonic power against a rising China. The encirclement of China with a bloc of pro-Western Southeast Asian regimes has been the cornerstone of US policy in Asia for decades. 

 

Containing China: America’s Ongoing Project 

As early as 1997, US policy makers were articulating a means of containing China’s rise. One such policy maker, Robert Kagan, stated in his 1997 op-ed, “What China Knows That We Don’t: The Case for a New Strategy of Containment,” that, “the choice we face is not between containment and engagement, but between an ineffective, unconscious, and therefore dangerous containment — which is what we have now — and a conscious and consistent containment that effectively deters and ultimately does change China.”

 

Kagan and other US policy makers’ desire to “change China,” includes the political reordering of the country within through covert subversion and the fueling of violent separate movements along its peripheries, as well as the military encirclement of China abroad. The recent pact between the Philippines and the US, giving American military might a new foothold in the Pacific, represents one of many attempts to encircle China. 

 

To understand this encirclement deeper, one must read through the 2006 US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute’s report titled, “String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power Across the Asian Littoral.” The 36 page report details the geopolitical and strategic background within which this latest pact between the Philippines and the US was signed.

 

The report states specifically that, “the United States should expect countries like Pakistan, Myanmar, Cambodia, and Vietnam to welcome overtures from China. Even America’s staunchest regional allies—Japan, South Korea, Australia, and the Philippines, for example—increasingly find it in their self-interest to improve ties with China. The United States also should expect occasional expressions of reticence over U.S. military presence throughout the region. This will not necessarily indicate a diminished friendship with America; rather it is a symptom of the perception that a peaceful region does not require U.S. military presence.”  

 

The report continues by stating (emphasis added), “this perception is a fallacy, however, since security is illusory. The United States can accommodate military sensitivities with a less visible presence or reduced footprint, but America cannot afford to abandon its military commitments in Asia. In the event China chose to pursue a more aggressive course, by seeking hegemony along the “String of Pearls,” the challenge to the United States could not be ignored. In the interim, even as nations delicately balance their relationships with United States and China in pursuit of their own self-interest, America needs to keep her alliances in good stead while encouraging China’s further participation in the international system as a responsible stakeholder.”

 

The incremental creep of US military forces back into the Philippines after they withdrew decades ago, signifies America keeping “her alliances in good stead.” Of course, this “international system” or “order,” the report refers to was described by Robert Kagan in his 1997 piece as serving “the needs of the United States and its allies, which constructed it.” In other words, this “system” or “order” within which the US would like China to submit, is a euphemism for US hegemony. 

 

US-Philippines Military Pact is an Empty, Unnecessary Provocation 

 

While the US and the government in Manila will attempt to sell the recent military pact as a means of maintaining peace and stability throughout the region, it is in fact going to do precisely the opposite. It is an adversarial policy aimed at pressuring and provoking Beijing, and in particular to undermine the perceived strength of China both at home and across the region. 

 

While analysts believe China will increase its military budget to counter the move, Beijing will likely only do so to a point. The threat to China and its interests by these new US forces is negligible. The US has neither the resources nor the political will to wage any war, anywhere, let alone with a nuclear-armed China and its billion plus population. Should China expend a disproportionate amount of resources toward its military, it may do so at the expense of domestic socioeconomic development, and give the US an opportunity to sow the seeds of dissent across its population. Subversion, unlike an external military threat, is still a cause for concern in Beijing. 

 

For the Philippines, its population must ask the sitting government what benefit such a pact extends to their nation’s prosperity and future. Allowing the island nation to be used as a proxy belligerent in America’s quest for hegemony is done so at the expense of its political ties and future with an increasingly influential China, its budget that will be surely redirected from domestic develop and toward a military build-up, and all the consequences of hosting American troops that made it necessary to prohibit them years ago in the first place.  

Over the next 10 years, the US will be using the Philippines to provoke and harass Chinese ambitions in the Pacific. Within these 10 years, irrevocable damage may be done between the Philippines and China, between their cultures and economies. As the US has done elsewhere, when it has achieved its goals, it will discard Manila and any responsibility for what it has done. For the sake of slaking intentionally drummed up nationalist fervor across the Philippines today, the Filipino people may end up paying for years well into the future. 

Ulson Gunnar is a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

City of London’s Imperialist Designs on Russia

by Dean Henderson ⋅

Ex: http://deanhenderson.wordpress.com

Yesterday the EU and US imposed additional sanctions on Russia, while 150 US troops landed in neighboring Estonia for military exercises.  Two months after Ukraine’s democratically-elected President Viktor Yanukovych fled the country amidst the MI6/CIA/Mossad-orchestrated putsch in Kiev(http://deanhenderson.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/ukraine-falls-under-fascist-bankster-thumb/), the West continues to ramp up its aggression against Russia, despite repeated attempts at diplomacy by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

So what else is new?

The Rothschild-led City of London bankers have held grand imperialist designs on Russia’s rich natural resources for two centuries, always to be stymied by the odd nationalist czar or Stalinist.  Putin thwarted their latest attempts when he jailed Israeli dual citizen Mikail Khodorkovsky and re-nationalized much of Russia’s energy sector.  It is no coincidence that one Russian official sanctioned yesterday was Igor Sechin – president of Russian oil giant Rosneft, of which BP still owns a 20 % share.

(Excerpted from Chapter 17: Caspian Sea Oil Grab: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)

Unholy Alliance

While the international banking syndicates had always dealt with the Soviet Union, access to its vast oil resources remained limited until Ronald Reagan entered the White House in 1980, determined to splinter the Soviet Union into little pieces and open the country’s oilfields to the Four Horsemen.  His point man in doing so was CIA Director Bill Casey, whose Roman Catholic Knights of Malta connections were thoroughly exploited.

The Vatican’s secretive Opus Dei “saintly Mafia” was behind the ascent of Polish Cardinal Karol Wojtyla to the Papacy.  Wojtyla became Pope John Paul II and launched an Opus Dei/Vatican offensive to roll back Latin American liberation theology movements and East European communism.  Fascism came naturally to Karol Wojtyla.  During the 1940’s he was a chemical salesman for Nazi combine I. G. Farben.  Wojtyla sold the Nazis the cyanide they used at their Auschwitz death camps.  One of his best friends was Dr. Wolf Szmuness, mastermind of the 1978 Center for Disease Control Hepatitis B study in the US, through which the AIDS virus was introduced into the gay population. [722]

In 1982 Reagan met with Pope John Paul II.  Prior to the meeting Reagan signed NSD-32, authorizing a wide range of economic, diplomatic and covert activities to “neutralize the USSR’s hold on Eastern Europe”.  At the meeting the two agreed to launch a clandestine program to tear Eastern Europe away from the Soviets.  Poland, the Pope’s country of origin, would be the key.  Catholic priests, the AFL-CIO, the National Endowment for Democracy, the Vatican Bank and CIA would all be deployed.

The Vatican is the world’s largest owner of equities, using Swiss affiliate Banco di Roma per la Svizzera to conduct its more discretionary business.  Italian fascist Benito Mussolini gave the Vatican generous tax exemptions which it still enjoys.  Banco Ambrosiano’s P-2 leader Robert Calvi’s Grand Oriente Freemason’s supported reconciliation with the Vatican.  Relations between the Vatican and the Freemasons were strained in the 11th century when the Greek Orthodox split from the Roman Catholics. Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaler of St. John factions emerged.  The latter was the Catholic faction. They changed their name to the Knights of Malta, after the island where they found refuge after their Crusades defeat, with help from the Vatican.  Malta is a nexus of CIA/MI6/Mossad intrigues.

In the 13th century Pope Clement V, backed by France’s King Philip, charged the Protestant Knights Templars with heresy, citing their penchant for drug running, arms peddling, gambling and prostitution rings.  These activities are what made the Templars “filthy rich”.  Pope Clement made an example of Templar leader Jaques de Molay, whom he burned at the stake on Friday the 13th. [723]  The Templars took their loot and fled to Scotland to found Scottish Rite Freemasonry.  They bankrolled the House of Windsor, which controls Britain and presides at the apex of Freemasonry around the world.  Masonic Lodge members enroll their children in the de Molay Society, which is named in honor of the toasted Templar pirate.

Calvi’s attempt to reconcile protestant and Catholic secret societies was a success. He became paymaster to the Polish Solidarity movement, while Nixon Treasury Secretary David Kennedy’s dirty Continental Illinois Bank served as conduit for CIA funds sent by Bank of Cicero asset Bishop Paul Marcinkus to fund Solidarity. [724]  The Vatican teamed up with Europe’s Black Nobility, the Bilderbergers and CIA to launch the top-secret JASON Society and armed South American dictators to quash liberation theology.  In 1978 when Pope John Paul II took power, the Vatican issued a commemorative stamp featuring an Egyptian pyramid and the Roshaniya all-seeing eye. [725]  The Vatican and the Illuminati Brotherhood were reunited.

Reagan’s meetings with Pope John Paul II were an affirmation of this powerful new alliance, which would now focus on bringing the Soviet Union to its knees.  Even before Reagan met with the Pope the CIA had groomed an informant at the Polish Ministry of Defense- Colonel Ryszard Kuklinski.  Kuklinski reported to the Vatican and helped organize the Polish Solidarity Movement, led by the wealthy Radziwill family who had funded JFK assassins via Permindex.  Most Solidarity leaders were old-money aristocrats.

The precursor to Solidarity was the National Alliance of Solidarists, a Russian/Eastern European fascist hit squad funded by RD/Shell’s Sir Henry Deterding and German Vickers Arms Corporation President Sir Basil Zacharoff.  Sir Auckland Geddes of Rio Tinto Zinc, which bankrolled Francisco Franco’s fascist coup in Spain, also contributed to the Solidarists.  Geddes’ nephew- Ford Irvine Geddes- was chairman of the Inchcape’s Peninsular & Orient Navigation Company from 1971-1972. [726]

The Solidarist’s US headquarters was the Tolstoy Foundation, which is housed in the same building as Julius Klein Associates, which ran guns to the murderous Haganah and Stern Gang Zionist death squads who stole Palestinian lands to found Israel. Klein was an M16 Permindex insider who helped plan the JFK hit.

The Solidarists stepchild, the Solidarity Movement, was touted in the Western media as a great Polish liberating force.  With boatloads of CIA help, Solidarity toppled the Communist government in Warsaw. Their straw man Lech Walesa became President of Poland.  In 1995 Walesa was defeated by former Communist leader Aleksander Kwasniewski.  Walesa was rewarded for his boot licking with a job at Pepsico.

CIA Director Casey demanded a constant focus on Eastern Europe at CIA.  Casey met often with Philadelphia Roman Catholic Cardinal John Krol to discuss the Solidarity Movement.  He utilized his Knights of Malta connections, leaning heavily on Brother Vernon Walters, whose spook resume read like a James Bond novel.  Walter’s latest incarnation was Reagan Ambassador at Large to Vatican Secretary of State Agostino Cardinal Casaroli. [727]  By 1991 Walters was US Ambassador to the UN, where he successfully beat the drums of war against Iraq.  He was in Fiji that same year, just prior to the overthrow of that left-leaning government.

Other Knights of Malta members involved in the Eastern European destabilization effort were Reagan NSA and Robert Vesco lieutenant Richard Allen, Reagan NSA Judge William Clark, Reagan Ambassador to the Vatican William Wilson and Zbigniew Brzezinski.  Other prominent Knights of Malta members include Prescott Bush, Nixon Treasury Secretary William Simon, Nixon coup-plotter Alexander Haig, contra supporter J. Peter Grace and Venezuelan Rockefeller lieutenant Gustavo Cisneros.

The Reagan team had a five-part strategy in its efforts to destroy the Soviet Union.  First, it would pursue the JASON Society’s Star Wars concept in an attempt to engage the Soviets in a space-based arms race which they knew Moscow could not afford.  Second, the CIA would launch covert operations in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary in attempts to overthrow those Soviet-allied governments.  While Walesa emerged in Poland, poet Vaclev Havel became CIA white knight in Czechoslovakia.  Like Walesa, Havel became unpopular and was soon tossed out of his puppet presidency.

A component of the CIA destabilization program was to buy weapons from these East European nations to arm CIA-sponsored rebels in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Angola and Mozambique, using BCCI and later BNL as conduits.  The US also wanted to get their hands on the high-tech Soviet arsenal.  Poland secretly sold the US an array of advanced Soviet weaponry worth $200 million.  Romania did the same. Both countries saw their foreign debts reduced significantly. [728]

The third component of the Reagan strategy was to make financial aid to the Warsaw Pact contingent on economic privatization.  Fourth, the US would blanket East European and Soviet airwaves with pro-Western propaganda, using fronts like Radio Liberty, Radio Free Europe and the Voice of America.  The CIA financed local newspapers and magazines.

The Company got help inside the Soviet Union from its Mossad buddies in an effort spearheaded by media mogul and Mossad paymaster Robert Maxwell.  When Maxwell threatened to reveal a meeting between KGB head Vladimir Kryuchkov and Mossad brass aboard his private yacht at which a coup against Mikhail Gorbachev was discussed, Mossad ordered a hit on Maxwell.  On November 4, 1991 as he sailed around the Canary Islands Maxwell was assassinated by Israeli commandos.  The mass exodus of Russian Jews to Israeli-occupied settlements in Palestine was part of the secret deal between Mossad and Kryuchkov, who is still serving time in a Moscow prison for his treasonous role in the Gorbachev coup. [729]

But it was the fifth and final component of Reagan’s strategy that had the Four Horsemen salivating.  Reagan’s spooks initiated an economic warfare campaign against the Soviet Union, which included a freeze on technology transfers, counterfeiting of the Russian ruble and the sponsoring of separatist Islamist groups in the Soviet Central Asian Caucasus. The jihadis who were instructed to target a key transcontinental natural gas pipeline which the Soviets were building.  The Soviets had more natural gas than any country on earth and saw the completion of this pipeline as their cash cow for the 21st century. [730]  Big Oil wanted to milk that cow.

It’s the Oil, Stupid

When the Soviet Union’s last President Mikhail Gorbachev announced his perestroika and glasnost campaigns to privatize his country’s economy, he was aiding the Illuminati in destroying his country.  Was Gorbachev duped, an unwitting accomplice, a CIA deep-cover agent or a mind-controlled Operation Presidio Temple of Set victim?  Whatever the case, he played a key role in dismantling the Soviet Union.

The Soviets controlled not only the vast resources of their own nation, but Third World resources in Soviet-allied Comecon nations.  Part of perestroika was to cease Soviet aid to these developing nations to ease the growing Soviet debt burden which, like the US debt, accrued largely from decades of Cold War military spending.  The two superpowers’ debt was held by the same international banks, which now used this debt lever to pick a winner and to open Russian and Third World resource pools to their corporate tentacles. [731]

When the Berlin Wall fell and Gorbachev was overthrown in favor of IMF crony Boris Yeltsin, the Four Horsemen rushed to Moscow to begin making oil deals.  Oil and natural gas had always been the Soviet’s main export and it remained so for the new Russia.  In 1991, the country earned $13 billion in hard currency from oil exports.  In 1992 Yeltsin announced that Russia’s world leading 9.2 billion barrel/day oil sector would be privatized.

Sixty percent of Russia’s Siberian reserves had never been tapped. [732]  In 1993 the World Bank announced a $610 billion loan to modernize Russia’s oil industry- by far the largest loan in the bank’s history.  World Bank subsidiary International Finance Corporation bought stock in several Russian oil companies and made an additional loan to the Bronfman’s Conoco for its purchase of Siberian Polar Lights Company. [733]

The main vehicle for international banker control over Russian oil was Lukoil, initially 20%-owned by BP Amoco and Credit Suisse First Boston, where Clinton Yugoslav envoy and Dayton Peace Accords architect Richard Holbrooke worked.  Bush Sr. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, who orchestrated the BNL cover-up, was now CS First Boston’s Chief Financial Officer.  A handful of Zionist Russian oligarchs, collectively known as the Russian Mafia, owned the rest of Lukoil, which served as the Saudi ARAMCO of Russia for the Four Horsemen, a partner to Big Oil in projects throughout the country which involved truly staggering amounts of capital.

These included Sakhalin Islands projects known as Sakhalin I, a $15 billion Exxon Mobil venture; and Sakhalin II, a $10 billion deal led by Royal Dutch/Shell which included Mitsubishi, Mitsui and Marathon Oil as partners.  Siberian developments were even larger.  RD/Shell is a 24.5% partner in Uganskneftegasin, which controls a huge Siberian natural gas field.  At Priobskoye, BP Amoco operates a $53 billion project. At Timan Pechora on the Arctic Ocean a consortium made up of Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco and Norsk Hydo runs a $48 billion venture.

In November 2001 Exxon Mobil announced plans to invest another $12 billion in an oil and gas project in the Russian Far East.  RD/Shell announced a $8.5 billion investment in its Sakhalin Islands concessions.  BP Amoco made similar proclamations. [734]  In 1994 Lukoil pumped 416 million barrels of oil, making it fourth largest producer in the world after RD/Shell, Exxon Mobil and part-owner BP Amoco.  Its fifteen billion barrels in crude reserves rank second in the world to Royal Dutch/ Shell. [735]

The Soviet Caucasus, with encouragement from Langley, soon split from Russia.  The map of Central Asia was re-written as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine and Georgia all declared their independence.  The pipeline Reagan ordered targeted carried Soviet natural gas east to the North Pacific port of Vladivostok and west to the Black Sea port of Novorrossiysk from the world’s richest known natural gas fields lying beneath and abutting the shoreline of the Caspian Sea, which lies in the heart of Caucasus.

The Four Horsemen coveted this resource more than any in the world.  They wanted to build their own private pipelines once they got their hands on the Caspian Sea natural gas fields, which also contain an estimated 200 billion barrels of crude oil.  Oil industry privatizations were quickly announced in the new Central Asian Republics which had, by virtue of their independence, taken control of the vast Caspian Sea oil and gas reserves.  By 1991 Chevron was holding talks with Kazakhstan. [736]

The Central Asian Republics became the largest recipients of USAID aid, as well as ExIm Bank, OPIC and CCC loans.  Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan were especially favored. These countries control the shoreline of the Caspian Sea, along with Russia and Iran.  In 1994 Kazakhstan received $311 million in US aid and another $85 million to help dismantle Soviet-era nuclear weapons.  President Clinton met with Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev. They signed an array of agreements ranging from disarmament deals to space research cooperation.  Kazakhstan, with an estimated 17.6 billion barrels of oil reserves, had been a strategic part of the Soviet nuclear weapons grid and was home to the Soviet space program.

The two leaders also signed an agreement providing investment protection for US multinationals.  The Free Trade Institute and US Chamber of Commerce sent officials to train Kazakhs in the finer arts of global capitalism.  The Four Horsemen moved in swiftly. Chevron Texaco laid claim to the biggest prize- the $20 billion Tenghiz oilfield- then grabbed another gusher at Korolev.  Exxon Mobil signed a deal to develop an offshore concession in the Caspian. [737]  Tengizchevroil is 45%-owned by Chevron Texaco and 25%-owned by Exxon Mobil. [738]  President George W. Bush’s NSA and later Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice, an expert on Central Asia, sat on the board at Chevron alongside George Schultz from 1989-1992. She even had an oil tanker named after her.

Across the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan was receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in US aid.  BP Amoco led a consortium of seven oil giants who spent an initial $8 billion to develop three concessions off the coast of the capital Baku- historic base camp of Big Oil in the region. [739]  BP Amoco and Pennzoil- recently acquired by Royal Dutch/Shell- took control of the Azerbaijan Oil Company, whose board of directors included former Bush Sr. Secretary of State James Baker.

In 1991 Air America super spook Richard Secord showed up in Baku under the cover of MEGA Oil. [740]  Secord & Company did military training, sold Israeli arms, passed “brown bags filled with cash” and shipped in over 2,000 Islamist fighters from Afghanistan with help from Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.  Afghan heroin began flooding into Baku.  Russian economist Alexandre Datskevitch said of 184 heroin labs that police discovered in Moscow in 1991, “Every one of them was run by Azeris, who use the proceeds to buy arms for Azerbaijan’s war against Armenia in Nagorno-Karabakh”. [741]

A Turkish intelligence source claims that Exxon and Mobil were behind the 1993 coup against elected Armenian President Abulfaz Elchibey.  Secord’s Islamists helped. Osama bin Laden set up an NGO in Baku as a base for attacking the Russians in Chechnya and Dagestan.  A more pliant President Heidar Aliyev was installed. In 1996, at the behest of Amoco’s president, he was invited to the White House to meet President Clinton- whose NSA Sandy Berger held $90,000 worth of Amoco stock. [742]

Armenian separatists backed by the CIA took over the strategic Armenian regions of Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhnichevan which border Turkey and Iran.  When Turkish President Turgut Ozal mentioned intervention in Nakhnichevan to back the Azerbaijani seizure, Turkish Premier Suleyman Demirel quickly played down the statement from the key US ally.  These two regions are critical to Big Oil plans to build a pipeline from the Caspian Sea across Turkey to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorrossiysk.  The same route is utilized by Turkey’s Gray Wolves mafia in their Central Asia to Europe heroin endeavors.  When Gray Wolf Mehmet Ali Agca tried to assassinate Pope John Paul II in 1981, the CIA used its Gladio strategy, trying to pin it on Bulgaria’s Communist Lukashenko government.

Lukoil owns 26% of the Russian Black Sea port at Novorrossiysk.  Its president Vayit Alekperov wanted to build the Caspian pipeline through Grozny in Chechnya, while the Four Horsemen preferred the route through Turkey.  CIA support for Armenian separatists and Chechen Islamist rebels ensured chaos in Grozny. Alekperov finally agreed to the Turkish route.

In 2003 the Defense Department proposed a $3.8 million military training grant for Azerbaijan.  Later they admitted it was to protect US access to oil.  As author Michael Klare put it, “Slowly but surely, the US military is being converted into a global oil-protection service”. [743]

Turkmenistan, which borders the Caspian Sea on the southeast, is a virtual gas republic, containing massive deposits of natural gas.  It also has vast reserves of oil, copper, coal, tungsten, zinc, uranium and gold.  The biggest gas field is at Dauletabad in the southeast of the country, near the Afghan border.  The Unocal-led Centgas set about building a pipeline which would connect the oil fields around Chardzhan to the Siberian oilfields further north.  More crucial to Centgas was a gas pipeline from Dauletabad across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. [744] Advisers to the project included Henry Kissinger. Unocal is now part of Chevron.

With the Four Horsemen firmly in charge of Caspian Sea reserves, the Caspian Pipeline Consortium was born.  Chevron Texaco took a 15% stake with the other three Horsemen and Lukoil splitting the rest.  Pipeline security was provided by the Israeli firm Magal Security Systems, which is connected to Mossad.  Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan have especially cozy relations with Israel via Special Ambassador Yusef Maiman, who is president of the Israeli Mehrav Group.  Mehrav is involved in a project in Turkey to divert water from the upper Tigres and Euphrates Rivers to the southeast part of Turkey and away from Iraq. [745]  The Caspian pipeline was built by Bechtel in partnership with GE and Wilbros Group.  The pipeline quietly began moving oil and gas in November 2001, just two months after 911.

Bechtel also built the oilfield infrastructure at Tengiz for Chevron Texaco.  In 1995 Bechtel led a USAID-funded consortium to restructure the energy sectors of eleven Central and Eastern European nations in line with IMF mandates.  Bechtel received a massive contract to upgrade Russia’s many ailing aluminum smelters in tandem with Pechiney.  Lukoil contracted with New Jersey-based ABB Lummus Crest (formed when engineering giants Asea Braun Boveri and Lummis Crest merged) to build a $1.3 billion refinery at the Novorrossysk port and to do a $700 million upgrade on its refinery at Perm.

The Bush Jr. Administration now planned a series of additional Caspian Sea pipelines to compliment the Tenghiz-Black Sea route.  A Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pipeline was built by a Four Horsemen consortium led by BP Amoco.  The law firm representing the BP-led consortium is James Baker’s family law firm- Baker Botts.  The BP Amoco pipeline runs the length of the country of Georgia through its capital Tblisi.

In February 2002 the US announced plans to send 200 military advisers and attack helicopters to Georgia to “root our terrorism”. [746]  The deployment was a smokescreen for pipeline protection.  In September 2002 Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivaniov accused Georgia of harboring Chechen rebels.  In October 2003 Georgian President Eduard Schevardnadze was forced to step down in a bloodless revolution.  According to a December 11, 2003 article on the World Socialist Party website, CIA sponsored the coup.

In September 2004 hundreds of Russian school children were killed when Chechen separatists seized their school building.  Russian President Vladimir Putin said of the incident, “Certain political circles in the West want to weaken Russia, just like the Romans wanted to weaken Carthage.”  He accused “foreign intelligence services” of complicity in the attacks.  His adviser Aslanbek Aslakhanov went further, stating on Russian Channel 2 News, “The men had their conversations not within Russia, but with other countries.  They were led on a leash.  Our self-styled friends have been working for several decades to dismember Russia… (they are the) puppeteers and are financing terror.”  Russia’s KM News ran the headline, “School Seizure was Planned in Washington and London”. [747]

Lukoil epitomizes the corruption so rampant in Russia since the Soviet collapse.  Bribery is the norm. Lukoil has given luxury jets to the mayor of Moscow, the head of Gazprom (the state-owned natural gas monopoly) and Kazakhstan President Nazarbayev.  In the mid-1990’s Lukoil announced that it would sell another 15 % stake to foreign stockholders through its largest owner and financial adviser CS First Boston and the Bank of New York. [748]  In 2002 they announced plans to sell off another big stake.

According to Kurt Wulff of the oil investment firm McDep Associates, the Four Horsemen, romping in their new Far East pastures, saw asset increases from 1988-1994 as follows: Exxon Mobil- 54%, Chevron Texaco- 74%, Royal Dutch/Shell- 52% and BP Amoco- 54%.  The Horsemen had more than doubled their collective assets in six short years.  This quantum leap in Anglo-American global power had everything to do with the takeover of the old Soviet oil patch and the subsequent impoverishment of its birthright owners.

[722] Behold a Pale Horse. William Cooper. Light Technology Publishing. Sedona, AZ. 1991.

[723] The Robot’s Rebellion: The Story of the Spiritual Renaissance. David Icke. Gateway Books. Bath, UK. 1994. p.94

[724] Hot Money and the Politics of Debt. R.T. Naylor. The Linden Press/Simon & Schuster. New York. 1987. p.78

[725] Ibid. p.165

[726] Dope Inc.: The Book that Drove Kissinger Crazy. The Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. Washington, DC. 1992

[727] “The Unholy Alliance”. Carl Bernstein. Time. 2-24-92. p.28

[728] “US Obtained Soviet Arsenal from Poland”. Eugene Register-Guard. 2-13-94

[729] The Other Side Of Deception. Victor Ostravsky. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 1994.

[730] Bernstein. p.28

[731] “The Dismantling of the Soviet Union”. Peter Symon. Philippine Currents. November/December 1991.

[732] “Drilling for a Miracle”. Fred Coleman. US News & World Report. 12-7-92. p.54

[733] Evening Edition. National Public Radio. 6-18-93

[734] “Exxon’s Russian Oil Deal Makes Other Firms Feel Lucky”. Wall Street Journal. 12-13-01

[735] “The Seven Sisters Have a Baby Brother”. Paul Klebnikov. Forbes. 1-22-96. p.70

[736] Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. Ahmed Rashid. Yale University Publishing. New Haven, CT. 2001. p.145

[737] “Christopher Promises Aid to Oil-Rich Kazakhstan”. AP. Northwest Arkansas Morning News. 10-24-93

[738] 10K Filings to SEC. Exxon Mobil and Chevron Corporations. 3-28-01

[739] “The Quietly Determined American”. Paul Klebnikov. Forbes. 10-24-94. p.48

[740] Azerbaijan Diary: A Rogue Reporter’s Adventures in a Oil-Rich, War-Torn, Post- Soviet Republic. Thomas Goltz. M.E. Sharpe. Armonk, NY. 1999. p.272

[741] “al-Qaeda, US Oil Companies and Central Asia”. Peter Dale Scott. Nexus. May-June, 2006. p.11-15

[742] See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA’s War on Terrorism. Robert Baer. Crown. New York. 2002. p.243-244

[743] Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Michael T. Klare. Metropolitan/Henry Holt. 2004. p.6-7

[744] Escobar. Part I

[745] “The Roving Eye: Pipelineistan, Part II: The Games Nations Play”. Pepe Escobar. Asia Times Online. 1-26-02

[746] “Wolf Blitzer Reports”. CNN. 2-27-02

[747] “Paranotes: Russian School Seige Conspiracy”. Al Hidell. Paranoia. Issue 37. Winter 2005.

[748] Klebnikov. 1-22-96. p.72

Dean Henderson is the author of five books: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network, The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries, Das Kartell der Federal Reserve, Stickin’ it to the Matrix & The Federal Reserve Cartel.  You can subscribe free to his weekly Left Hook column @ www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com

INDES : ELECTIONS 2014

INDES : ELECTIONS 2014 [3]

 

Les musulmans courtisés

Michel Lhomme
Ex: http://metamag.fr

Narendra Modi, candidat du Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP : Parti du peuple Indien) au poste de premier ministre de l'Inde et probable vainqueur du scrutin en cours a déclaré qu'il ferait appel à ses « frères » musulmans comme à tout autre citoyen du pays. Il a précisé que les questions litigieuses du temple de Ram et de la réforme du Code civil seraient traités dans le cadre constitutionnel. Un projet prévoit en effet un code civil universel qui s'opposerait en droit au code « coutumier » musulman ou tribal. 

 

Narendra Modi a notamment souligné qu'il considérait tous les Indiens comme un seul peuple et qu’il en est de sa responsabilité en tant que futur chef d'Etat de parler à tous les segments religieux de la société, y compris les musulmans. Pour appuyer cette déclaration, il a fait allusion à son travail en tant que ministre en chef du Gujarat qui possède une forte population musulmane et des militants hindouistes déterminés. On se rappelle les émeutes communautaires de 2002. 

En Inde, les élections sont toujours l'occasion de surenchères religieuses dans les campagnes électorales et l'appui total du BJP au temple de Ram a renforcé l'exaltation des militants hindouistes sur le terrain. Narendra Modi se devait de calmer le jeu. Face à un journaliste engagé du BJP qui l'interrogeait sur les raisons d'un tel rapprochement, Modi a même dû taper sur la table : « Vous ne me ferez pas glisser sur ce genre de terrains. Je rencontrerai tous mes compatriotes. Ils sont mes frères. Vous pouvez voter avec la couleur que vous voulez mais Modi n'a pas de  couleur », allusion à la bataille entre la couleur safran du BJP et le vert des partis musulmans. Il a ajouté: « Même si je perds les élections, qu'il en soit ainsi, je n'ai pas de problème. Mais le pays a été détruit par la mentalité d'entre vous, et je n'aurai jamais cet état d'esprit ! » Est-ce un tournant dans la campagne ? 

La communauté musulmane a attaqué le programme du BJP et de son candidat sur les questions du temple de Ram et du Code civil. Cela a même été ces dernières semaines le point de discorde entre ce parti et la communauté musulmane. Narendra Modi est bien obligé s'il veut gouverner l'Inde de rassurer et de garantir le respect de la Constitution. En politique professionnel, il s'est dissocié de l'influence du RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) qui lui colle à la peau. Le RSS est l'armée de réserve radicale, le mentor idéologique de l'hindouisme identitaire dont le BJP constitue la façade publique. Le candidat toujours en tête des sondages est bien obligé de composer au centre. « Je dois diriger le gouvernement. Un gouvernement fonctionne selon la Constitution. Je crois que le gouvernement ne dispose que d'une religion, l'Inde, l'Inde en premier. Un gouvernement ne dispose que d'un livre saint, notre Constitution. Un gouvernement ne dispose que d'une sorte de dévotion, la Nation. Un gouvernement ne dispose que d'un style de fonctionnement, le « Sabka Saath, Sabka vikas »  ( la coopération de tous, le développement de tous ) ».  Le mandat du futur premier ministre indien est de cinq ans. Or, les cinq premières années de l'Inde vont être décisives car toute la région est en reconfiguration stratégique. C'est pour cela que nous avons décidé de couvrir les élections indiennes avec attention. Pour l’Europe, entre eurasisme et eurosibérie, n’y a t-il pas un autre axe Paris-Berlin, Moscou-Delhi ?

Will Japan and Russia Escape the New Cold War?

TRENIN, Dmitri

Ex: http://valdaiclub.com

 

Related News

• Gang of Two: Russia and Japan Make a Play for the Pacific
• Russian-Japanese relations: What lies ahead?
• Japan and Russia shouldn't miss the opportunity to have a better relationship

As Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was visiting Beijing last week, it was announced that the visit to Moscow by Japan's foreign minister Fumio Kishida was being postponed. The announcement, of course, came amid the rising tensions in Ukraine and the continuing fundamental deterioration of the West's relations with Russia. Japan, after all, is a loyal ally of the United States.

Yet, both Tokyo and Moscow have gone to some lengths to limit the damage. The joint announcement was couched in most polite phrases. The Russian foreign ministry spokesman, Alexander Lukashevich, allowed no criticism in his public comments on the postponement decision. Clearly, with the threats of economic sanctions against Russia still on the table in Washington and in EU capitals, even after the recent Geneva agreement on Ukraine, Moscow looks to Tokyo to make up for the likely losses in Europe and North America.

Japan's Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, for his part, has not yet given up on Russia. As a geopolitical thinker, he needs Russia in an effort to balance China's rise. As a pragmatist, he thinks of going beyond simply importing energy from Russia, and seeks a stake in Russia's energy projects. As a strategist, he does not want Moscow to step up too much the technological level of its arms transfers to China's People's Liberation Army, by delivering, in particular, the S-400 air defense systems. Ideally, Shinzo Abe would also want to become the prime minister to finally resolve the almost 70-year-old territorial issue between Tokyo and Moscow.

None of this is going to be easy, but none of this is totally impossible either-provided the Japanese do their part by becoming what Germany, until recently, has been to Russia: a major technological partner, a leading investor, and a gateway to the wider region. Doing this will be exceedingly difficult, of course, in the current environment of intensifying U.S.-Russian rivalry. However, Abe may have a few useful arguments to offer to President Barack Obama when he comes to Tokyo.

Why should the US-Russian rivalry be allowed to strengthen Beijing? Who benefits when the United States is less comfortable and Japan feels less safe? In this new cold period in Russian-Western relations, there are already a few protected areas of collaboration, like non-proliferation. Why not a vibrant Japan-Russia link too? After all, wasn't it the one missing piece, even a strategic oversight in the original U.S. "pivot to Asia" concept?

Dmitri Trenin is Director of the Carnegie Moscow Center.

This article was originally published on www.carnegie.ru

Dilema shakespeariano de Obama: ¿guerra fría contra Rusia o China?

por Alfredo Jalife-Rahme

Ex: http://paginatransversal.wordpress.com

Hoy el “nuevo muro” entre Washington y Moscú se recorrió de Berlín a Kiev: al borde de la balcanización entre la parte “occidental” (eurófila) de Ucrania y su parte “oriental” (rusófila), cuando la superestratégica Crimea ha retornado a la “madre patria” rusa.

Después de su sonoro fracaso en Crimea, con su política de asfixiante cerco a Rusia y su pretendido “cambio de régimen” con disfraz “democrático” en Moscú, Zbigniew Brzezinski comenta en Twitter (19/3/14): “Si Occidente apoya, Ucrania libre (sic) puede sobrevivir (sic). Si no lo hace, Putin puede desestabilizar toda Ucrania”.

El fulminante revire del zargeoestratégico global, Vlady Putin, tiene hoy a la parte “oriental” en jaque con su exquisito movimiento de ajedrez en Crimea, que colocó a la defensive a Zbigniew Brzezinski, ex asesor de Seguridad Nacional de Carter, íntimo de Obama y connotado rusófobo, quien tendió la letal trampa jihadista a la URSS en Afganistán que, por sus metástasis, derrumbó el Muro de Berlín y mutiló al imperio soviético.

Los ciudadanos de Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña no desean más aventuras bélicas en Siria ni en Ucrania, cuando sus multimedia se olvidan de las bravatas atómicas de John McCain, quien goza la menor aceptación como senador, y explotan una amenaza de Dmitry Kiselyov, presentador de la televisión Rossiya-1, quien espetó que Rusia podría “convertir a Estados Unidos en ceniza radiactiva”(http://news.yahoo.com/state-tv-says-russia-could-turn-us-radioactive-212003397.html ).

Sí existen líneas rojas, no sólo de Estados Unidos, sino también de Rusia, lo cual es susceptible de desembocar en una guerra nuclear de “destrucción mutua asegurada” (MAD, por sus siglas en inglés), cuando las “cenizas radiactivas” serían “mutuas”.

Un editorial del rotativo chino Global Times (http://www.globaltimes.cn/NEWS/tabid/99/ID/849399/Putin-faces-war-of-attrition-with-West.aspx) comenta que las sanciones, de corte sado-masoquista, para lastimar la economía de Rusia, “señalarán el grado de determinación de Occidente para contener a Rusia”, cuando Putin”ha mostrado su dedicación para asegurar los intereses de Rusia, que han impresionado al mundo entero (sic)”.

El rotativo considera que Obama no ha tomado aún “una decisión final en la forma de contener a Rusia estratégicamente”, cuando “Putin despedazó las ofensivas (¡supersic!) de Occidente en el este de Europa, que empezaron al final de la guerra fría”.

Hoy “el límite estratégico entre Rusia y Occidente está siendo redefinido”: Rusia, “estrangulada durante un largo periodo, ha acumulado demasiada fuerza para lanzar una contraofensiva” y puede “enfrentar una guerra de desgaste con Occidente”.

El rotativo chino tampoco se hace ilusiones y sentencia que “la fuerza de Rusia es limitada (¡supersic!). Ni tiene la fuerza nacional de la anterior URSS ni la ayuda del Pacto de Varsovia. Si Occidente está determinado a emprender una confrontación prolongada (sic) con Moscú, Rusia sufrirá desafíos sin precedente”. Sin duda. Pero es mucho mejor que el “cambio de régimen” preprogramado de Estados Unidos en Moscú.

Su pronóstico es adverso: las”sanciones económicas desembocarán en una situación perder-perder. Occidente compartirá el peso de las pérdidas económicas, mientras Rusia estará sola” (¡supersic!), cuando “la estabilidad de Rusia no está garantizada”.

Por lo pronto, “Moscú le ha dado a Occidente y a sus seguidores una lección, obligándolo a reconsiderar el papel de Ucrania en Europa” y aconseja que “Putin debe dejar algún espacio para que Occidente se retire en una manera elegante, lo cual maximizará los intereses de Rusia”. De acuerdo.

El editorial chino arguye que”Occidente se percató que ha perdido la batalla por Crimea”, que “puede ser una victoria para Moscú o el inicio de una confrontación sin fin entre Rusia y Occidente”.

Juzga que a Putin le conviene”mantener el pleito en baja (sic) intensidad, que se acomode a los intereses de largo plazo de Rusia”.

El editorial no se jacta que el gran triunfador resultó China (a mi juicio, junto a Irán e India), lo cual expresa sin tapujos el investigador geoestratégico Artyom Lukin: “el triunfador en Ucrania… es China” (http://www.fpri.org/articles/2014/03/ukraine-and-winner-china ).

Juzga que las sanciones de Occidente contra Rusia “empujarán inevitablemente a Moscú a los brazos de Pekín”, lo cual “incrementará la probabilidad de que sus políticas se alineen frente a Occidente”, lo cual, a su vez, “reforzará las posiciones estratégicas de China en Asia”.

China “se sentirá más confiada en su rivalidad con Estados Unidos para su primacía en la región Asia/Pacífico, después de haber adquirido a Rusia como una zona estratégica segura en su espalda, así como un acceso privilegiado a su abundante energía, a su base de minerales y a sus tecnología militar avanzada”, a juicio de Artyom Lukin, en la visita de Putin a China en mayo “será muy visible cuando los eventos de Ucrania ayudarían a concretar el proyectado gasoducto de Rusia a China”.

No soslaya que los comentarios de la prensa oficial china son “simpáticos a Moscú”, al enfatizar la”determinación de Putin para proteger los intereses de Rusia y los ciudadanos rusófilos”, mientras los ciudadanos chinos expresan su admiración (¡supersic!) por Putin y su desafío a Occidente en portales como Weibo.

Artyom Lukin aduce que existe una”probabilidad cero (sic) para que Pekín apoye cualquier castigo político y económico en contra de Moscú”: algo así como una “neutralidad benevolente” de China con el Kremlin.

Cita a “algunos estrategas de Estados Unidos quienes lamentan que una presión excesiva (¡supersic!) de Occidente puede alterar el equilibrio geopolítico al empujar a Rusia más cerca de China”.

Artyom Lukin arguye que ahora Estados Unidos se encuentra en una posición delicada para confrontar a dos grandes potencias en Eurasia en forma simultánea y “tendrá que decidir cuál región es más importante a sus intereses: la Europa oriental post soviética (cuyo corazón es Ucrania) o Asia oriental”.

Considera que una batalla sin compromisos en Ucrania oriental de Estados Unidos contra Rusia, “en 10 o 15 años puede significar la pérdida de Asia oriental”.

Concluye en forma optimista que la “presente situación en Ucrania no resultará en una guerra, pero puede convertirse en un paso mayor hacia la transformación del orden internacional a una bipolaridad confrontativa” entre “Occidente, encabezado por Estados Unidos, frente al eje China/Rusia”, lo cual se subsume en mi tesis del “G-7 frente a los BRICS” (ver Bajo la Lupa, 16/3/14): el nuevo “muro de Kiev” de la bipolaridad metarregional.

Si no malinterpreto a Artyom Lukin, Rusia exhorta a Occidente a la cesión de “Ucrania oriental” a cambio de no arrojarse a los brazos de China y, por extensión, a los BRICS e Irán.

Mientras Michelle Obama llega con sus hijas a una visita de siete días a Pekín, por invitación de la esposa del <mandarín Xi, no hay que soslayar la búsqueda de Zbigniew Brzezinski de un acercamiento de Estados Unidos con China para castigar a Rusia, como sucedió con Nixon hace 43 años.

Entramos a la “teoría de juegos”, con tres rivales geoestratégicos, de característica no lineal hipercompleja.

Obama se encuentra ante el shakespeariano dilema geoestratégico de su vida: ¿quién será el máximo competidor geopolítico de Estados Unidos: Rusia o China, o los dos?

www.alfredojalife.com

Twitter: @AlfredoJalife

Facebook: AlfredoJalife

Énergies : vers un contrat russo-chinois de fourniture de gaz?

Énergies : vers un contrat russo-chinois de fourniture de gaz?

 

 

BRUXELLES (NOVOpress) - Les partisans de sanctions contre la Russie, notamment le Commissaire européen à l’énergie Günther Oettinger et une grande partie de « l’élite » bureaucratique européenne, se plaisent régulièrement à souligner la dépendance économique et financière de la Russie des importations européennes, et par conséquent sa vulnérabilité économique.

 

Lien de cause à effet auquel Günther Oettinger n’a peut-être pas réfléchi, l’UE ne dispose de réserves de gaz que pour quelques jours si la Russie impose un arrêt de livraison, comme l’indique une étude réalisée par Steffen Bukold (politologue allemand, spécialiste des questions énergétiques).

 

En outre, la Russie semble avoir déjà trouvé des alternatives au marché européen : il se pourrait qu’il y ait un contrat d’approvisionnement de 30 ans avec la Chine. L’analyste de Citigroup Ronald Smith pense qu’un tel accord russo-chinois sera mis en place cette année.

 

Sans transition rapide vers les sources d’énergies renouvelables, l’UE est toujours dépendante des livraisons de gaz russe. Si l’Union européenne poursuit sa politique hostile à l’égard de la Russie, une hausse des prix ou des pénuries d’approvisionnement pourraient frapper l’économie européenne massivement… Non sans raison, l’ancien chancelier allemand Helmut Schmidt a appelé les sanctions contre la Russie un “non-sens” (“dummes Zeug”).

 

http://fr.novopress.info/

The U.S. Empire Is Trying Desperately To Contain the Eurasian Alliance

The U.S. Empire Is Trying Desperately To Contain the Eurasian Alliance of Russia, China, Central Asian Nations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan

By Jack D. Douglas

Ex: http://www.lewrockwell.com

The U.S. and its puppets, especially the E.U. and Nato, have been trying to weaken the rebuilding Russian empire as much as possible to contain it, while maintaining the  U.S. Global Empire.

This has become a vital, crucial goal because of the rapid growth of Chinese power and the ever closer Alliance of Russia, China, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Central Asia, Pakistan, etc.

The U.S. and E.U. are desperate to stop Russia from rebuilding its vast Central Asian states within the Russian Federation and this new Alliance, especially because of the vast Caspian Sea oil and gas. The E.U. is highly dependent on Russia for gas and on Russia, Iraq, Iran and the pro-Russian Caspian Sea powers, especially Kazakhstan. The Russian move into the Black Sea is another major step in that direction. Kazakhstan publicly supported the Russian move to reunite with the Crimea. Kazakhstan is the great prize, with 30% of its population  Russian and a vast border with Mother Russia. Russia is probably not at this time trying to reunite Kazakhstan with Russia, since that would involve many more problems, but simply to keep it as a close ally, as the Ukraine was until the violent overthrow of the Kiev government by the U.S. supported coup.

Russia, Iran, Iraq, and their Central Asian allies are close to a vast oligopoly on the oil and gas exports of the world, especially to the E.U., U.K., China, India, etc.

Saudi Arabia is desperate to break the growing Iran-Iraq-Syria-Hizbollahp-Russian-Central Asian power block. Right now it is trying desperately to build its own military forces to offset the U.S. withdrawal from the region, but that is absurd. In the long term, Saudi Arabia will align with Russia-China-Iran-Central Asia or be overthrown from within by those who will become reasonable.

China, now firmly in the Russian-Central Asia-Iran-Iraq block with gas lines from Russia, etc., is moving forcefully into all of the South China Sea to control oil and gas there. The U.S. is desperate to stop that, but China keeps moving out.

All of that puts the dying U.S. Empire on a collision course with the vast Russian-Chinese-Iranian-Central Asian Alliance. Pakistan has become very anti-U.S. because of the U.S. attacks in Pakistan and is allying more and more with China. Even India is working more and more closely with Iran and its allies to get the gas they need. Just yesterday the president of Iran spoke in Afghanistan calling for a great regional entente, working together more and more closely. That is the likely route for Iranian oil and gas to India.

Ultimately, the U.S. Empire must withdraw from its vast over-stretch to save itself financially and economically, politically and militarily.

The E.U. knows that, so Germany’s Prime Minister talks privately with Putin in German and Russian about the American Global Crisis. [She knows Russian and he knows German, so it's easy.] Germany, the E.U. and Russia are moving toward a long run understanding once the crippled U.S. implodes financially or withdraws to save itself. The CEO of Siemens, the giant and vital German technology corporation, has just visited with Putin in Russia and made public statements of strong plans to continue working with Russia very closely. Other German CEO’s have done the same, acting as informal reassurances from the Prime Minister that her public words going along with the U.S. more or less do not mean any kind of break with the close relations with Russia.

The Best of Jack D. Douglas

President Xi calls on China, Germany to build Silk Road economic belt

President Xi calls on China, Germany to build Silk Road economic belt

(Xinhua) - Ex: http://www.chinadaily.com

 

 

Chinese President Xi Jinping (center) visits Port of Duisburg of Germany March 29, 2014. [Photo/Xinhua]

 

DUSSELDORF, Germany - Chinese President Xi Jinping Saturday called on China and Germany to work together to build the Silk Road economic belt.

Xi made the remarks during a visit to Port of Duisburg, the world's biggest inland harbor and a transport and logistics hub of Europe.

 

 

The Chinese leader expressed the hope that Port of Duisburg will play a bigger role in the China-Germany and China-Europe cooperation.

Xi witnessed the arrival of a cargo train at the railway station in Duisburg from the southwestern Chinese city of Chongqing. The train had travelled all the distance along the Chongqing-Xinjiang-Europe international railway.

The Chinese president, accompanied by Vice German Chancellor and Minister of Economics and Energy Sigmar Gabriel, was warmly welcomed by Hannelore Kraft, premier of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia, and Soren Link, mayor of the city of Duisburg.

Kraft and Link, in their speeches at the welcome ceremony, said the state and the city will grasp the opportunities that the initiative on the Silk Road economic belt brings to them, and step up the cooperation with China.

China's Xi Jinping urges US to show restraint over Ukrainian crisis

Ex: http://www.geopolitica.ru

China feels that all parties related to the situation in Ukraine should show restraint to avoid fomenting tension, the President of the People’s Republic of China, Xi Jinping, said in a statement. "China has taken an unbiased and fair stand on Ukraine’s issue. The situation in Ukraine is involved, so all parties should retain composure and show restraint, to prevent tension from making another upward spiral”, the Chinese leader said in a telephone conversation with his US counterpart Barack Obama.

Xi Jinping pointed out that the crisis should be settled politically and diplomatically. He said he hoped that all the parties interested would be able to reconcile their differences in a proper way, through contact and consultation, and would bend every effort to find a political solution to the problem.

President Xi said the situation in Ukraine is "highly complicated and sensitive," which "seems to be accidental, (but) has the elements of the inevitable."

He added that China believes Russia can "push for the political settlement of the issue so as to safeguard regional and world peace and stability" and he "supports proposals and mediation efforts of the international community that are conducive to the reduction of tension."

"China is open for support for any proposal or project that would help mitigate the situation in Ukraine, China is prepared to remain in contact with the United States and other parties interested”, the Chinese President said.

The Xinhua news agency said earlier in a comment that Ukraine is yet another example for one and all to see of how one big country has broken into pieces due to the unmannerly and egoistic conduct of the West.

West’s Muted Response on Terror Attack in China

Tony Cartalucci

West’s Muted Response on Terror Attack in China

Source: Simon Song

Ex: http://journal-neo.org

Saturday March 1, 2014′s horrific terror attack at China’s Kunming railroad station left 29 victims dead and over 100 wounded. The terrorist attack was the work of Uyghur separatists hailing from Western China’s Xinjiang province. The US would only condemn the attack as an act of terror after China accused Washington of applying double standards to its coverage and stance on the incident. 

 However, the US’ failure to initially condemn the attack as terrorism runs deeper than mere superficial double standards applied to a global competitor. The US is in fact driving the separatist movement in Xinjiang, encouraging violence and creating faux-human rights organizations to then condemn the predictable response of Chinese security forces. 

Indeed, first and foremost in backing the Xinjiang Uyghur separatists is the United States through the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED). For China, the Western region referred to as “Xinjiang/East Turkistan” has its own webpage on NED’s site covering the various fronts funded by the US which include: 

International Uyghur Human Rights and Democracy Foundation
$187,918
To advance the human rights of ethnic Uyghur women and children. The Foundation will maintain an English- and Uyghur-language website and advocate on the human rights situation of Uyghur women and children. 

International Uyghur PEN Club
$45,000
To promote freedom of expression for Uyghurs. The International Uyghur PEN Club will maintain a website providing information about banned writings and the work and status of persecuted poets, historians, journalists, and others. Uyghur PEN will also conduct international advocacy campaigns on behalf of imprisoned writers. 

Uyghur American Association
$280,000
To raise awareness of Uyghur human rights issues. UAA’s Uyghur Human Rights Project will research, document, and bring to international attention, independent and accurate information about human rights violations affecting the Turkic populations of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. 

World Uyghur Congress
$185,000
To enhance the ability of Uyghur prodemocracy groups and leaders to implement effective human rights and democracy campaigns. The World Uyghur Congress will organize a conference for pro-democracy Uyghur groups and leaders on interethnic issues and conduct advocacy work on Uyghur human rights.

All of these NED-funded organizations openly advocate separatism from China,  not even recognizing China’s authority over the region to begin with – referring to it instead as “Chinese occupation.”  

Of the recent terror attack, the US-funded World Uyghur Congress would even attempt to justify it by claiming Chinese authorities have left the separatists with little other choice. The US State Department’s “Radio Free Asia” report titled, “China’s Kunming Train Station Violence Leaves 33 Dead,” reported:

World Uyghur Congress spokesman Dilxat Raxit said in an emailed statement that there was “no justification for attacks on civilians” but added that discriminatory and repressive policies provoked “extreme measures” in response.

Just as the US has done in other nations it is fomenting political chaos and armed violence in such as Syria, it is attempting to steer clear of labeling the Xinjiang separatists as “terrorists” for as long as possible in order to sow the maximum amount of chaos at the cost of Chinese political stability.

All Part of the Plan 

The US’ support of the Xinjiang separatists is just one small cog in a much larger machine grinding toward the encirclement and containment of China, while maintaining American hegemony across the Asia Pacific, Central Asia, and beyond. The use of faux-human rights organizations to defend what is essentially a terrorist organization is a trick the US has repeated in Russia’s Caucasus region. 

This containment strategy is documented in the 2006 Strategic Studies Institute report “String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power across the Asian Littoral” where it outlines China’s efforts to secure its oil lifeline from the Middle East to its shores in the South China Sea as well as means by which the US can maintain American hegemony throughout the Indian and Pacific Ocean. The premise is that, should Western foreign policy fail to entice China into participating in the “international system” as responsible stakeholders (fall in line,) an increasingly confrontational posture must be taken to contain the rising nation.

This includes funding, arming, and backing terrorists and proxy regimes from Africa, across the Middle East, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and even within China’s territory itself. Documented support of these movements not only include Xinjiang separatists, but also militants and separatists in Baluchistan, Pakistan where the West seeks to disrupt a newly christened Chinese port and pipeline, as well as the machete wielding supporters of Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar’s Rakhine state - yet another site the Chinese hope to establish a logistical hub.

US aspirations to contain China through a network of proxies dates back even further than the SSI 2006 report. In US policy scribe Robert Kagan’s 1997 piece in the Weekly Standard titled, “What China Knows That We Don’t: The Case for a New Strategy of Containment, he states (emphasis added):

The Chinese leadership views the world today in much the same way Kaiser Wilhelm II did a century ago: The present world order serves the needs of the United States and its allies, which constructed it. And it is poorly suited to the needs of a Chinese dictatorship trying to maintain power at home and increase its clout abroad. Chinese leaders chafe at the constraints on them and worry that they must change the rules of the international system before the international system changes them. 

In truth, the debate over whether we should or should not contain China is a bit silly. We are already containing China – not always consciously and not entirely successfully, but enough to annoy Chinese leaders and be an obstacle to their ambitions.

Kagan would continue (emphasis added):

We should hold the line instead and work for political change in Beijing. That means strengthening our military capabilities in the region, improving our security ties with friends and allies, and making clear that we will respond, with force if necessary, when China uses military intimidation or aggression to achieve its regional ambitions.

It is clear that the writings of Kagan are not just simply his own personal thoughts in 1997, but reflect a policy that has since then been implemented vis-à-vis China. It is also clear that “with force” does not necessarily mean the mobilization of America’s conventional military assets, but also includes covert and proxy forces as seen more recently in Libya and Syria.

The horrific attack in Kunming China is not an isolated incident. It is a tentacle of America’s containment policy manifested as terrorism toward China briefly breaking the surface of murky geopolitical waters. For the rest of the world increasingly influenced and dependent on the sustainable and stable rise of China on the world stage, it is essential to understand the true nature of events playing out within China and along its peripheries. Failing to do so leaves us vulnerable to investing in false causes that will only further destabilize China, Asia, and the world – threatening our best interests while serving the machinations of Wall Street/Washington yet again.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Extension du système mondialiste

L’ALLIANCE DU PACIFIQUE

Extension du système mondialiste

Auran Derien
Ex: http://metamag.fr

 

L’Alliance du Pacifique (Chili, Pérou, Colombie, Mexique) a été le cadre, début février, d’une signature commune pour éliminer, entre eux, les droits de douane. Juan Manuel Santos, président de la République de Colombie, partisan de l’alliance avec les Etats-Unis, a immédiatement affirmé que le développement de la région en serait favorisé. Cette Alliance pèse 215 millions d’habitants et obéit à la logique des regroupements promue par les organismes financiers.

Qui a intérêt aux regroupements ?

L’intégration recherchée a rarement des bases géopolitiques ou culturelles. Dans les accords de libre-échange, les produits industriels qui sont contrôlés par les multinationales n’ont pas besoin d’être protégés par des droits de douane. Entre les normes, les brevets, le conseil, les subventions de toutes sortes, le produit rapporte suffisamment. Les pays d’Amérique Latine, ayant peu investi dans la recherche et l’éducation sont facilement convaincus d’ouvrir leurs frontières pour contribuer, modestement, à une phase non essentielle d’élaboration d’un produit (exemple : l’aviation). Un pays perd lentement et sûrement la maîtrise de son destin et se retrouve désarticulé comme un puzzle renversé. L’Organisation Mondiale du Commerce se charge d’ailleurs de détruire ce qui reste de politique de développement endogène. Elle offre aux multinationales la possibilité de vassaliser tranquillement les pays de l’Alliance du Pacifique en imposant la vente des activités économiques.

 

Un mécano sans finalités.

 

Les membres de l’Alliance du Pacifique se vantent toujours d’attirer des investissements étrangers. Pour compenser l’influence occidentale, nous avons indiqué que la Chine était en passe de devenir leur deuxième fournisseur derrière les Etats-Unis. La zone de libre-échange prévue regroupe, en plus des quatre pays de l’Alliance, l’Australie, le Canada, le Japon, la Malaisie, Singapour et le Vietnam. Qu’y-a-t-il de commun entre ces cultures, qui puisse fonder une civilisation de paix et de justice ? Rien!

Les multinationales vont et viennent, comme l’aciériste Arcelor-Mittal qui a signé un accord de cinq ans avec le groupe canadien Evrim Resources pour exploiter le minerai de fer qui pourrait encore s’exploiter au Mexique. La rédaction des accords est toujours très technique et très précise pour favoriser les procès, régulièrement gagnés par les multinationales face aux Etats. Les textes des accords de libre-échange sont systématiquement fondées sur trois négations: aucune différence entre les investisseurs (étrangers ou autochtones); aucune contrainte de transfert technologique, aucun apport obligatoire de devises, pas de consommations intermédiaires locales. Enfin, les cadres viennent du vaste monde sans aucun lien avec la culture locale. Au total, l’investissement direct ne profite pas à la communauté; les marchandises circulent sans entraves et sans vérification ; tous les autochtones sont traités avec le plus profond mépris.

La globalisation de l'économie est acceptée et votée car on  fait croire que cela aidera le reste du monde à se développer. Mais la réalité confirme que les financiers nous plongent dans la crise. Toutes les zones disparates de libre-échange créées dans le monde n’ont qu’un seul objectif : assurer des super-profits et, en passant, payer de hauts salaires à des fonctionnaires dévoués.

La génération qui vient devra en finir avec ce monde. 

 

Eurasianism

Mark Hackard

 

Ex: http://www.geopolitica.ru

 

Russian emigre philosopher and geopolitician Pyotr Nikolaevich Savitsky (1895-1968) was a leading figure of the classical Eurasianist movement that flourished after the Bolshevik Revolution and during the inter-war years. In this excerpt from a 1925 essay, Savitsky expounds the Eurasianist worldview, one based on traditional spiritual values rather than the modern materialists’ reign of quantity.

 

Eurasianists join those thinkers who reject the existence of universal progress…If a line of evolution runs differently through various spheres, then there can be no general ascending movement, no gradual and unbending general improvement; one or another cultural medium, improving in one area (from one point of view), often degrades in another and from another point of view. This position is applicable, in particular, to the European cultural medium: it has bought its scientific and technical “perfection,” from the point of view of the Eurasianists, with ideological and most of all religious impoverishment. The duality of its achievements is distinctly expressed in relation to the economy. Over the course of long centuries in the history of the Old World, there existed a certain singular correlation between the ideological-moral-religious principle on the one hand and the economic principle on the other. More precisely, there existed some ideological subordination of the latter principle to the former.

 

Namely the permeation of the whole approach to economic issues by the religious-moral moment allows some historians of economic theories (for example, the old mid-nineteenth century German-Hungarian historian Kautz, whose works up to now haven’t lost a certain significance) to unite into one group – by their relation to economic problems – such varying texts as Chinese literary fragments, the Iranian code of the Vendidad, the Mosaic law, the works of Plato, Xenophon, Aristotle and the medieval Western theologians. The economic philosophy of these texts is in a well-known sense the philosophy of a “subordinate economy;” the connection between satisfaction of our economic requirements with the general principles of morality and religion is emphasized within all of them as something necessary and proper.

 

The economic philosophy of the European “new era” is opposed to these views. Not always by direct words, but more often by the foundations of worldview, the new European economic philosophy asserts the cycle of economic phenomena as something self-sufficient and of autonomous value, containing and drawing from within itself the objectives of human existence. It would be a sign of spiritual blindness to negate the enormity of those purely cognitive achievements and successes in understanding and viewing economic phenomena that the new political economy has accomplished and accumulated. Yet acting as an empirical science and indeed in a certain and greater degree being such, in a whole host of its attitudes, the new political economy has influenced intellects and epochs as a metaphysic…

 

Just as the economic ideas of the ancient legislators, philosophers and theologians are tied to certain metaphysical conceptions, the economic ideas of the new economists are also tied to them. But if the metaphysics of the first was a philosophy of “subordinate economics,” then the metaphysics of the second is a philosophy of “militant economism.” The latter is in some way the ideological price that the new Europe has paid for the quantitatively tremendous economic growth she has experienced in modernity, especially in the last century. There is something instructive in this picture – both at the close of the Middle Ages and in the course of the new era, the ancient wisdom of moral testament, immemorial and restraining the egotistical instincts of man through words of exhortation and denunciation, the philosophy of “subordinate economics” is crumbling under the offensive of the new modern ideas, with the theory and practice of militant economism conceitedly asserting itself.

 

Historical materialism is the most consummate and dramatic expression of the latter. There is far from an accidental link between the philosophy of subordinated economics on the one hand and militant economism on the other, as we observe in empirical reality, with a certain attitude to questions of religion. If the philosophy of subordinated economics always serves as an appendage to one or another theistic worldview, then historical materialism is ideologically bound to atheism.

 

Like a wolf in fairy tales, the atheistic essence once hiding in historical materialism has now cast off the diversionary sheepskin of empirical science that had covered it: the atheist worldview is perpetrating its historical triumph in Russia, and state power in the hands of atheists has become an instrument for atheist propaganda. Not examining the question of historical responsibility for what has happened in Russia and not wishing to relieve anyone of this responsibility, the Eurasianists at the same time understand that the essence Russia assimilated and implemented, due to the susceptibility and excitability of her spiritual being, is not a Russian essence at its source and spiritual origin. The Communist witches’ Sabbath ensued in Russia as the completion of a more than two-hundred year period of europeanization.

 

To admit that the spiritual essence of Communist rule in Russia is, in a special manner, the reflected ideological essence of Europe’s new era is to make an assertion that is empirically founded to a high degree. (Here we must consider the following: the origin of Russian atheism in the ideas of the European Enlightenment; the importation of socialist ideas into Russia from the West; the connection of Russian Communist “methodology” with the ideas of French Syndicalists; and the significance and “cult” of Marx in Russia.) But having seen the ideological essence of European modernity in the form that was brought to its logical conclusion, Russians, not accepting Communism and at the same time not having lost the ability to think logically, cannot return to the basis of Europe’s latest ideology.

 

In the consciousness of the Eurasianists, there flows from the experience of the Communist Revolution a certain truth, simultaneously old and new – a healthy social community can be based only upon the indissoluble tie of man with God. An irreligious community and an irreligious sovereignty must be rejected; this rejection predetermines nothing in relation to concrete legal-constitutional forms, and there may exist as such a form, in the conception of the Eurasianists, of “separation of Church and state,” for example. Yet essentially, it is nevertheless highly significant that perhaps the first government by a consistently atheistic Communist power that had turned atheism into the official faith proved to be an “organized torment,” in the prophetic words of the profound nineteenth-century philosopher Konstantin Leontiev, a system of shock and destruction of “the common good” (in the name of which Communist power was established) and such an outrage upon the human person that all images pale and all words are powerless in the portrayal of a terrible, unprecedented and blasphemously bestial reality.

 

And we reiterate: the circumstance that the first consistently atheist power proved itself the dominion of the bestial is hardly an accident. Historical materialism, and the atheism that supplements it, deprives man’s primarily animal instincts of their restraint (including the primarily economic instincts, which amount to robbery). The basic defining force of social existence in the conditions of materialism and atheism’s ideological dominance turns out to be hate and delivers its deserved fruits: torment for everyone. And sooner or later it cannot but bring the final fruit – torment to the tormenters.

 

Russia enacted the triumph of historical materialism and atheism, but those laws that manifested in the course of her Revolution concern far from her alone. The cult of primarily economic interest and every sort of animal primacy has also germinated abundantly in the consciousness of peoples outside of Russia, and neither can it be the basis for a long-lived and successful society beyond her borders. The destructive forces gathering in these conditions will sooner or later overcome the power of social creation here, as well. One has to approach the problem in all its depth and breadth. The pressure of the materialist and atheist outlook must be opposed with an ideological essence overflowing with valuable and weighty content. There can be no hesitation. With still unheard-of directness and unbending resolve, on the broadest front and everywhere, it is necessary initiate and lead the struggle with everything associated even in the slightest degree with materialism and atheism. The evil must be traced back to its roots; we need to literally uproot it. It would be a superficial and powerless attempt to fight only with the most pronounced manifestations of historical materialism and atheism, or Communism alone. The problem is set deeper and at a more essential level. War must be declared upon militant economism wherever it might reveal itself. In the name of our religious worldview we must gather our forces, and with ardent feeling, clear thought and the fullness of understanding, combat the specific spirit of the new Europe.

 

Since the Continent has arrived at that historical and ideological frontier where it is at present, we can assert with great probability that in some period of the future, one of two outcomes will occur. Either the cultural medium of the new Europe will perish and scatter as smoke in tortuously tragic upheaval, or that “critical,” in the terminology of the Saint-Simonians, epoch that began in Europe with the close of the Middle Ages should come to an end and be replaced by an “organic” age, an “age of faith.” Past a certain measure, one cannot trample with impunity ancient wisdom, for in it is truth – not on the basis of elevating primarily selfish human instincts into the higher principle upheld in the philosophy of militant economism, but on the basis of an enlightened religious feeling of restraint and control of these instincts, thereby achieving a practicable higher measure of the “common good” on earth. A society given over to exclusive concern for worldly goods will sooner or later be deprived of them; such is the terrible lesson that shows through from the experience of the Russian Revolution.

 

The Eurasianists attempt to conclusively and thoroughly clarify and comprehend this experience, extract all the lessons streaming out of it, and be fearless in the matter. This is in contradistinction to those who have in confusion and timidity reeled from Communism’s beastly image, yet have not refused that which composes the basis or root of Communism; those who seizing the plough, look back; who try and pour new wine into old skins; who, having seen the new truth of Communism’s repulsiveness, are not strong enough to denounce the old abomination of militant economism, whatever forms the latter might assume.

 

Private faith is insufficient – the believing person should be conciliar. The Eurasianists are men of Orthodoxy. And the Orthodox Church is the lamp that illuminates them; they call their compatriots to Her, to Her Sacraments and Her Grace. And they are not troubled by the terrible sedition that has arisen in the heart of the Russian Church through the incitement of the atheists and theomachists. Spiritual strength will be sufficient, the Eurasianists believe; the struggle leads to enlightenment.

 

The Orthodox Church is the realization of higher freedom; its principle is concord, as opposed to the principle of authority that dominates in the Roman Church that separated from her. And it seems to the Eurasianists that in the stern matters of the world, one cannot make do without stern authority, but in matters of spirit and the Church, only grace-filled freedom and concord are good instructors. In some spheres of its worldly affairs, Europe demolishes the efficacy of authority and introduces a tyrannical power. The Orthodox Church has for long centuries been a light only to those nations who stayed faithful to her; she shined with the truths of her dogma and with the exploits of her ascetics.

 

At present, perhaps, a different period approaches: the contemporary Orthodox Church, continuing the succession of the ancient Eastern Church, received from her a whole unprejudiced approach to forms of economic life (so contradictory to the techniques of the Western Church, for example, which for long centuries fought against the collection of interest) and to the achievements of human thought. And therefore, it may be that within the framework of the new religious epoch, namely the Orthodox Church in the greatest measure is called to consecrate the achievements of the latest economic technology and science, having purified them from the ideological “superstructure” of militant economism, materialism and atheism, just as in her time, in the age of Constantine, Theodosius and Justinian, within the framework of a genuine and inspired “age of faith,” the ancient Church was able to consecrate a quite complex and developed economic way of life and considerable freedom in theological and philosophical thought. In contemporary economic life and empirical science, whatever its development, there is nothing that would exclude the possibility of their existence and prosperity in the depths of the new epoch of faith. The combination of modern technology with the ideology of militant economism and atheism is in no way either obligatory or unavoidable.

 

From the religious outlook, economic technology, whatever the limit of its possibilities might be, is a means of realizing the Testament laid by the Creator into the foundation of the human race: “and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” Empirical science, from the religious point of view, is the uncovering of a picture of God’s world – whereby through the advance of knowledge, the wisdom of the Creator is ever more fully and completely revealed…

 

(с) 2007-2014 Геополитика.ru. Возрастная категория сайта 18+

Свидетельство о регистрации СМИ "Информационно-аналитического портала "ГЕОПОЛИТИКА" Эл № ФС 77-32517 от 18 июля 2008 года.
Свидетельство выдано "Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи и массовых коммуникаций".
Все права защищены. Перепечатка авторских материалов допускается только при наличии ссылки на портал Геополитика.ru.
Телефон редакции: (495) 514- 65-16

Soviet-Afghan War Lesson

Soviet-Afghan War Lesson: Political Problems Never Settled by Force

By Sergey Duz
The Voice of Russia

Ex: http://www.lewrockwell.com

25 years ago, the almost 10-year long deployment of the limited contingent of Soviet forces in Afghanistan drew to a close. Experts have since been at variance about the assessment of the Afghan campaign, but they invariably agree that it was the biggest-scale (and actually quite ambiguous, obviously for that reason) foreign policy action throughout the post-war history of the Soviet Union.

The last Soviet soldier left Afghanistan on February 15th 1989 as part of the Soviet 40th Army, which was the backbone of the limited contingent. The Soviet troops withdrew under the command of the 40th Army legendary commander, Lieutenant-General Boris Gromov. He managed to brilliantly carry out the withdrawal, with the US now trying to use his experience to more or less decently pull out of Afghanistan following the more than 20 years of actually useless occupation of that country. This is what an expert with the Centre for Modern Afghan Studies, Nikita Mendkovich, says about it in a comment.

“The Americans will have to rely heavily on intercontinental delivery means, because the troops are being evacuated to another region, to another continent. Back in 1989, it was largely a ground-force operation. The Soviet troops pulled out by land via Central Asia. The basic problem of any operation of this kind is security. Huge masses of troops and a great number of military vehicles are moving along the roads, so they should be guaranteed against likely attacks. To attain the objective, one can either reinforce local garrisons that will remain deployed in Afghanistan after the pull-out of the bulk of the troops and will cover the withdrawal, or reach agreement with the enemy not to attack the leaving troops, because this is not in the enemy’s interests”.

There are both similarities and numerous differences between the Soviet and American campaigns in Afghanistan. The main difference is that the Soviet Union did manage to achieve its goal, whereas with the United States it is no go. The Soviet troops were to render assistance to the Afghan government in settling the home policy situation. Secondly, the Soviet troops were to prevent external aggression. Both objectives were fully attained.

The Soviet political leadership felt that the revolution of April 1978 had no right to lose. Ideological reasoning was reinforced by geopolitical considerations. This predetermined Moscow’s decision to send troops, says editor-in-chief of the National Defence magazine, Igor Korotchenko, and elaborates.

“The Afghan campaign was inevitable if seen from the perspective of defending the Soviet Union’s national interests. It may seem odd, but Afghans are still nostalgic about the times when Soviet troops were deployed in their country. Even former field commanders can’t help but show some sort of liking for the Soviet Union, for the Soviet Army. We were no invaders; we helped build a new Afghanistan. The Soviet troops built tunnels, ensured the operation of water-supply systems, planted trees, built schools and hospitals, and also production facilities. The Soviet troops were indeed performing their international duty, they accomplished quite a feat. When the Soviet troops pulled out, Najibullah had a strong Afghan Army under his command. He remained in control of the situation in Afghanistan for 12 or 18 months. His regime fell when the Soviet Union cut short its material supply for Kabul. The current Afghan regime of Karzai will certainly prove short-lived; it’s no more than a phantom. The US troops will hardly pull out with their heads held high, the way the Soviet soldiers did”.

But then, some people disagree that all Afghans were happy about the Soviet military presence. The Soviet Prime Minister Alexei Kosygin pointed out the danger of the Soviet troops getting drawn into guerrilla warfare. He said in late 1979 that the invasion of Afghanistan “would trigger drastically negative many-sided consequences”. “This would essentially become a conflict not only with imperialist countries, but a conflict with the proper Afghan people. Now, people never forgive things like that”, Kosygin warned, and proved correct. This is what the chairman of the Common Afghan Centre in St. Petersburg, Naim Gol Mohammed, says about it in a comment.

“The people of Afghanistan have their own traditions, mentality and culture. The belligerent Pashtun tribes have never taken orders from anyone. These tribes never take to foreign troops. The locals revolted against the Soviet troops. The Soviet troop withdrawal in 1989 was followed by a period of anarchy. Government agencies were non-operational. The Soviet Union supplied Afghanistan with whatever was required quite well. But once the Soviet troops were out, the supplies were brought to a halt. That was bad. But the Soviet Union made the right decision, for it is impossible to defeat Afghans on their own soil”.

Quite a few experts insist that however tragic or pointless the Soviet military campaign in Afghanistan may seem, it had largely influenced the shaping of the new Russia’s optimal foreign policy. Moscow is perfectly aware today that no use of force can help resolve political problems, that these can only have a negotiated settlement. Moscow is trying to put the idea across to the main geopolitical players today. This is the most important lesson that should be learned from what experience the Soviet Union gained in Afghanistan.

Reprinted from The voice of Russia.

Vladimir Odintsov :

The USA’s Asia Policy is Shifting

Ex: http://journal-neo.org

 

The February 5th discussion in Congress of the issue of the United States’ Asia policy came as a clear confirmation of the course taken by Washington influence by hawks: transitioning from the balanced approach of the past to solving territorial disputes in the Pacific Rim to a tougher stance, one including the use of force. The intent of updating future US activities in Asia is reflected in the very name of the congressional subcommittee hearing: “America’s Future in Asia: From Rebalancing to Managing Sovereignty Disputes.” It wholly confirmed Washington’s decision of transitioning to a position of imperial dictatorship in that area of the world, where in recent times the US has regularly expressed grievances against China regarding the recently announced Chinese Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), which includes a number of islands in the South China Sea.

According to reports of various foreign observers, a fairly obvious tension in relations between the two countries has appeared in recent days, despite Washington’s outward declaration of willingness to develop a bilateral cooperation with China in a number of arenas. In the view of many analysts, this is largely due to a shift in US military strategy and its particular emphasis on the strengthening of its strategic presence in the Pacific region as a means of combating Chinese expansion in Asia. The sharpest of these confrontations are in the field of military strategy and of competition for influence over regional economic trade unions. The underlying motive for this is clear: each year 5.3 trillion dollars of the trade turnover takes place in the South China Sea, with US trade accounting for 1.2 trillion of the total amount.

A session of the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and Emerging Threats of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US House of Representatives termed “China’s Maritime and Other Geographic Threats” held on October 30th, 2013 is a clear indication of the growth of anti-Chinese sentiment in the American political establishment. This session, chaired by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, witnessed a significant rise in the inciting of military confrontation with China in the Pacific Rim region, as well as a quest by US politicians to further strengthen US expansion in that part of the world by military confrontation with China, looking to Japan for support.

Giving testimony before a congressional subcommittee on February 5th, the US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Daniel Russel, stated that the United States is acting against “China’s incremental efforts to assert control over the area contained in the so-called “nine-dash line” (i.e. China’s territorial demands in the South China Sea)”. He added, “I think it is imperative that we be clear about what we mean when the United States says that we take no position on competing claims to sovereignty over disputed land features in the East China and South China Seas…we do take a strong position that maritime claims must accord with customary international law…”

This assertion, repeated several times during his testimony before Congress and in a briefing for foreign journalists which took place on February 4th in the US Department of State Foreign Press Center, may indicate significant changes in US foreign policy in the Asia-Pacific region. Before Russel’s testimony the United States officially announced its neutrality in respect to maritime disputes in the South China Sea, which was used by American diplomats primarily as a denial of the military component of Washington’s policy in the region. The White House now, however, takes a “strong position” on the issue and intends to use certain provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) – which the US itself has not yet joined – to place increased pressure on China and to denounce Beijing’s maritime demands.

Adjusting for the adoption of its modified position in the Pacific Rim region Washington “aided” the Philippine government in bringing a judicial lawsuit against China before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which will review the issue on March 30th of this year in Hague. This step, however, is clearly a link in Washington’s coordinated military propaganda campaign against China, as the same day that Russel gave testimony before Congress the New York Times published an interview with president of the Philippines Aquino, in which he compared Beijing’s territorial demands in the South China Sea with Hitler’s 1938 seizure of the Czech Sudetenland, equating China’s activities with those of Nazi Germany. In support of Aquino’s inflammatory comparison, on February 6th of this year The Atlantic temporarily carried an article with a critique of China.

When, with the clear sanction of the White House, the US media begins comparing a country with Nazi Germany, it becomes obvious that the American war machine is gaining momentum in its preparations for the next war, in which military industry circles have long been interested. The “informational support” of such a shift in US foreign policy was provided in the form of speeches delivered by a number of congressmen before congressional subcommittee hearings on maritime disputes, which took place last week. Testimony was brought by congressmen Ami Bera, Steve Chabot, Randy Forbes, Brad Sherman and a number of others in support of a forceful US position and of confrontation with Beijing over disputed territories in the Pacific Rim region.

Meanwhile, an active relocation of the US submarine fleet in the Pacific Ocean is underway, as well as the modernization and expansion of the US military base on Guam, its largest base in the Western Pacific since World War II, although the military equipment there is already sufficient for large-scale military activities, according to a number of military experts. The building of additional military bases on the South Korean Island of Jeju, the Australian Cocos Islands and the expansion of its base on the Diego Garcia Islands is clearly in the Pentagon’s interest. Singapore has already given permission for the use of its Navy base, Chang, for better control over the Malacca Strait, through which 80% of its Chinese oil imports arrive…

Under such circumstances, the true agenda of US vice-president Biden and US Deputy Secretary of State William Burns’ visits to the region becomes increasingly clear, as well as that of the upcoming visits of Secretary of State John Kerry, Minister of Defense Chuck Hagel and a number of other high-level US officials. The US’s political balancing act in the Pacific Rim region is truly shifting.

Vladimir Odintsov, a political observer, exclusively for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook.

Taliban bedreigen niet-islamitisch bergvolk

Taliban bedreigen niet-islamitisch bergvolk: bekeer je of sterf!

Ex: http://www.parool.nl

 

 

Kailash-vrouwen in Islamabad op een bijeenkomst over de verschillende culturen in het land. © epa

De Kalash, het Pakistaanse bergvolk dat zegt af te stammen van Alexander de Grote, zijn altijd veilig geweest achter hun muren van rots en ijs. Maar de Taliban hebben 'een gewapende strijd' aangekondigd tegen deze stam, omdat deze zich nooit heeft bekeerd tot de islam.

Er komen weinig buitenstaanders in de Chitral-vallei. De wegen zijn een groot deel van het jaar onbegaanbaar en voordat een vliegtuig het aandurft om op te stijgen, moeten de weersomstandigheden absoluut perfect zijn: de kleine luchthaven ligt weggemoffeld tussen bergtoppen van meer dan achtduizend meter hoog.

Dit is misschien wel het mooiste deel van Pakistan. Bergtoppen torenen woest, rauw en overdonderend boven de vallei uit. Overal is water: rivieren, beken en watervallen vechten zich een weg naar beneden en op sommige plaatsen verandert grijze rots in een boomgaard vol roze bloesem of velden vol wuivende tarwe.

Altijd met rust gelaten

Vroeger werd deze vallei gedomineerd door gematigde Ismaëlies, een aftakking van de islam die wordt geleid door de Agha Khan. Nu zijn soennitische moslims er in de meerderheid, maar ook zij hebben de 3.500 Kalash altijd met rust gelaten. De rijzige mannen en vrouwen, vaak met lichte ogen en een lichte huid, leven in hun afgelegen dorpen, ver in de bergen.

Soms ondernemen toeristen de lange reis om de Kalash te zien. Een enkele buitenlander. Een handjevol Pakistanen uit 'de vlaktes'. Die laatste groep is overigens niet erg populair bij de Kalash-vrouwen, zo vertelden ze in 2002 in een interview met de Volkskrant. 'Ze verstoppen hun eigen vrouwen, maar komen wel naar onze gezichten kijken', zei een jong meisje. 'Ze hebben geen respect.'

'Bekeer of sterf'

Begin deze maand, op 2 februari, verscheen er een video op een website van de Taliban die volgens persbureau AFP begint met prachtige beelden van de vallei. Daarna zegt een stem dat de Kalash zich tot de islam moeten bekeren, of zullen sterven.

'Bij de genade van Allah heeft een groeiend aantal mensen van de Kalash de islam omarmd. We willen aan de hele stam duidelijk maken dat de leden zullen worden vernietigd met hun beschermers, de westerse agenten, als ze niet bekeren.'

In de video worden internationale non-gouvernementele organisaties ervan beschuldigd in Chitral te infiltreren om de cultuur van de Kalash te beschermen, en daarmee mensen weg te houden van de islam. De liefdadigheidsorganisatie van de Agha Khan wordt hierbij als voorbeeld genoemd, en de stem zweert om dergelijke snode plannen in de kiem te smoren.

(Door: Sacha Kester)

 

Author: Salman Rafi Sheikh

 

Pakistani Province of Baluchistan at Cross-Roads of Geo-Political games

Ex: http://journal-neo.org

 

Baluchistan, the energy rich western province of Pakistan, has been experiencing violence and conflict in the form of insurgency for many decades. Although this insurgency has partly resulted from the socio-economic deprivation of the province, however, there is also another dimension of this conflict—the direct involvement of certain foreign powers both regional and international. They have they been exploiting this deprivation for igniting conflict but also providing both the material and non-material support to the insurgents by passing resolutions in favour of an ‘Independent Baluchistan’ and providing military equipement for sustaining skrimishes against the government and the army of Pakistan. This very foreign involvement which has turned this otherwise ‘socio-political struggle’ against deprivation into different sub-forms: ethno-nationalism, sectarianism, provincial chauvinism, terrorism and ‘Talibanism’. And, it is this very foreign involvement that has made the insurgency exclusively ‘Baluch insurgency’ instead of an insurgency of the people of Baluchistan which include Pashtun and other ethnic communities too. However, these forms of the on-going spate of large scale violence are not necessarily the result of that purely Baluch struggle against deprivation, nor are the people of Baluchistan, or more specifically people of typical Baluch ethnic origin, themselves directly involved in it. There is a definite global geo-political context which, when taken into account, does explain to a reasonable extent the spread of violence and instability.

This aspect is related to the geographical location of Baluchistan at the maritime interface of the Western, Southern and Eastern segments of Asia alongside the Indian Ocean that further enhances its importance in facilitating global trade and energy shipments. Baluchistan thus provides a number of shortest possible land and sea route to and from the East and the West. For this very reason Baluchistan has become a ‘geo-strategic’ fulcrum of this arena of extremely heightened geo-political competition. The US sponsored idea of “Greater Baluchistan” has done Baluchistan no good. On top of all Baluchistan’s territorial link with Afghanistan and use of its territory for the facilitation of NATO supplies has made it even more vulnerable to the geo-political maneuvering of the US and its allies in the region.

The idea of “greater Baluchistan” includes not merely territorial disintegration of Pakistan alone; it also includes that of both Iran and Afghanistan. In introducing a resolution on ‘independent Baluchistan’ in the US House of Representative in 2012, the US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher said that the people of Baluchistan, “currently divided between Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan, have the right to self-determination and to their own sovereign country,” adding that they should be afforded full opportunity to choose their own status among the community of nations. This ‘moral support’ is being followed by the supply of ample foreign fundings, arms deliveries and military training. In 2001, Jane’s information group, one of the leading sources on intelligence information, reported that the RAW and MOSSAD have created five new agencies to penetrate Pakistan to target important religious figures, civil and military personnel, journalists, judges etc, and the current situation and information provided by Pakistan’s various security agencies also verifies the fact of foreign involvement in Baluchistan. Even the government of Afghanistan has been abetting the disruptive forces in igniting conflict in the region by providing territorial sanctuaries to the so-called insurgents.

The continuing Baluch struggle against “deprivation”, properly supplied by the Western fighter for the greater good have successfully spread the conflict into many zones of Baluchistan, making them virtually independent. By repeatedly highlighting and emphasizing the state of deprivation of the Baluch people, the US and its allies have been exploiting the Baluch youth that is dying out with foreign arms in its hands in an attempt to attain the much yearned after ‘national’ independence from the ‘dictatorial’ domination of the Punjab. In this context, the US Congress bill on Baluch’s right to separation and self determination, tabled in 2012, is one of the manifest examples of the deliberately designed geo-political maneuvering. That bill was and is not only a violation of the internationally recognized principle of non-intervention, but also a sort of window dressing of the US’ and its Western allies’ global agendas. In essence, it was nothing else but an attempt to give a ‘legitimate’ cover to pursue, on part of the US, the twentieth century grand objectives which include domination of the region extending from Baluchistan to Central Asia and Eurasia and to Eastern Asia by way of segmenting the entire region, thereby controlling and dominating the flow of energy to and from the Eastern, Central and Western segments of Asia through the Indian Ocean.

It is for this reason that many US policy makers have, from time to time, been emphasizing the geo-strategic significance of Baluchistan in terms of serving the “grand objectives” of the US. For example a prominent US expert on South Asian affairs, Selig Harrison, urged the White House in 2011 to contain the fast spreading influence of China in the India Ocean, “by supporting the movement for an independent Baluchistan along the Arabian Sea and working with Baluch insurgents to oust the Chinese from their budding naval base at Gwadar.” Similarly, the evidence of such an interest in disintegrating Pakistan can also be found in an article, “Blood Borders” written by a military analyst of the US, Lt. Col. Ralph Peter, who presented the idea of revision of the boundaries of the entire Middle East as per the wished of the people of locale, and further suggested the placement of the US forces in the region to “continue to fight for security from terrorism, for the prospect of democracy and for access to oil supplies in a region that is destined to fight itself.”

The US has thus been using its presence in Afghanistan, which is by default linked to the attainment of the US’ grand objectives, to play dirty game in Baluchistan too. In 2012, during a briefing to the upper house of Pakistan’s parliament, the then interior minister of Pakistan, Mr. Rehman Malik, presented a number of letters written by the Afghan government to provide funds, visas, weapons and ammunition to Brahamdagh Bugti’s followers inside Baluchistan. Only in Kandhar there were reported 24 CIA sponsored training camps which train insurgents for carrying out their militant missions inside Baluchistan; and moreover, since 2002, the CIA has been running training camps inside Baluchistan for the Baluchistan Liberation Army (BLA) and it has considerably assisted it in establishing a ‘state within a state.’

Needless to say, the CIA’s use of mercenaries to fight covert wars is an escapable feature of the US foreign policy. The arrest of such a mercenary, Raymond Davis, in Lahore blew the lid off the extensive role CIA covert operations are playing in creating the climate of violence and instability throughout Pakistan, and more specifically in Baluchistan. The underlying purpose of such covert operations is to manipulate in favour of supporting the Baluch peoples’ right to self-determination through secession.

That is how the neo-imperial forces of the West, led by the US, have been applying the policy of divide and rule—the classic political stratagem that has not escaped the interest of the neo-colonial states. While the truth is that the location of Baluchistan at the interface of three major segments of Asia, its maritime significance because of Gwadar port, its capacity to provide the shortest possible route to the landlocked states of Afghanistan and Central Asia, its capacity to serve as an international energy transit corridor, and its own untapped numerous reservoirs of energy sources add to its significance in the current era of extremely heightened competition in and around the Indian Ocean. As such, by disintegrating Pakistan, leading to an extended redrawing of regional boundaries, the US can significantly alter regional balance of power, and can place its own military in the region in the name of ‘maintaining peace and security.’

The US, in its quest for dominating the world is showing little to no respect for human rights Despite the fact that Pakistan is a non-NATO ally of the US,  is standing in the way of the U.S. and pays a handsome price for it.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs. Exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Rangoon Realpolitik: Russia, India courting Myanmar

Rangoon Realpolitik: Russia, India courting Myanmar

by Rakesh Krishnan Simha

Ex: http://indrus.in

 

 

A strategic axis that was threatening to develop between Myanmar, China and Pakistan has been nixed by the Southeast Asian country’s growing ties with Russia and India.

 

Myanmar Army Commander Gen Min Aung Hlaing on a visit to Delhi in 2012. Source: AP

A mini version of the Great Game is being played out in Asia – and the prize is Myanmar, strategically overlooking the main shipping channel that connects the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Long boycotted and forgotten by much of the world, the Buddhist country’s military junta – perhaps unwillingly – had developed strong military and commercial ties with China and Pakistan.

Part of the blame for Myanmar tilting towards China and Pakistan goes to next-door neighbour India. Showing a complete lack of realpolitik, New Delhi had shunned the Myanmarese military rulers while openly supporting the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

The friendless junta opted for 'friends' who were available. At one time, Myanmar used to refer to China as “paukphaw” – the Myanmarese word for sibling. The strategic and military relationship between the two resulted in Chinese fighter jets, tanks and missiles pouring into Myanmar. Military advisors soon followed and soon the army, air force and navy were being trained by Chinese officers.

India's huge stakes in Myanmar

In return China got access to Myanmar ports, offering Beijing with strategic influence in the Bay of Bengal, in the Indian Ocean region and Southeast Asia. Worryingly for India, China built a massive intelligence gathering network on Great Coco Island. Located just 18 km from India’s Andaman & Nicobar Islands, it allows China to monitor India's military activities, including missile tests, in the area.

Pakistan followed in China’s wake. In 2001, three Pakistan Navy vessels - a submarine, tanker and destroyer - visited Yangon Port. This was an unprecedented development because until then Myanmar had maintained it would not permit foreign navies to visit the country.

Enter Moscow

Despite deep defence ties the Myanmarese were loath to buy their insurance policy from just two countries – especially when one of them was a known international outcaste. Myanmar had never quite forgotten that in 1963 Moscow had provided the newly installed military government with three helicopters. Russia, having lost ground in its former strongholds such as Iraq, Libya and Syria, also saw an opening into a growing market.

In 2009 Moscow cracked that market, selling the Myanmar Air Force 20 MiG-29s in a $570 million deal, edging out the Chinese who had offered their knockoff fighters. Russia’s MiG Corp also pitched in, helping upgrade Myanmar's main military airstrip.

‘India needs Myanmar, and Myanmar also needs India’

Russia also sold Myanmar Mi-35 attack helicopters, aircraft trainers, artillery guns, air defense systems, tanks, radars and communication equipment.

According to Wikileaks, Russian diplomats were able to connect with the secretive Myanmarese generals. “Russia has exceptional access in Naypyidaw (the capital), including to top military leaders; and [the Russian ambassador] has been the most outspoken defender of the regime’s policies, including its human rights record during sessions with visiting UN officials,” reads the leaked cable.

The Myanmarese generals were glad they had made the right buys. The cable shows Russian helicopter gunships were successfully deployed against Kachin rebels.

India’s reset

Alarmed by the Chinese military and intelligence gathering bases in Myanmar, India has taken a long-overdue policy u-turn. Indian military supplies are now trickling into the country. These include maritime patrol aircraft, naval gunboats, 105 mm light artillery guns, mortars, grenade-launchers and rifles.

India has reported agreed to Myanmar’s request for assistance in building offshore patrol vehicles (OPVs). More importantly, it has green lighted a request to double the number of vacancies for training Myanmarese Navy officers and sailors from the current quota of 50. India will also train Myanmarese pilots to fly Russian-built Mi-35 helicopters.

Ethnic violence in Myanmar

According to The Diplomat, Myanmar is currently engaged in a competitive naval buildup with Bangladesh, particularly since the maritime standoff between their navies in 2008, which did not portray Myanmarese naval capabilities in a particularly good light. It is in this backdrop that Myanmar has asked for more from India – new radars, sensors and sonars for its naval frigates and corvettes.

In a sign that India is shedding its Gandhian reticence towards military exports, the Defence Research & Development Organisation’s hull-mounted sonar (HUMSA) – which is designed for small frigates, corvettes and OPVs – is being exported to the Myanmar Navy.

The sonars are also part of a larger pipeline of naval sensors being supplied to Myanmar, which has in the past included BEL-built RAWL-02 Mk III L-band 2D search radars and commercial grade navigation radars that are being sported by Myanmar Navy ships, reports The Diplomat. The primary offensive weapon of these ships is the Russian built Kh-35 Uran anti-ship missile.

While India would like to play a larger role in Myanmar, especially its democratisation process, the junta is in no hurry to travel that path. Instead they find the Vladimir Putin school of democracy more suited to the needs of a developing country that is reeling under separatist movements.

A Mandela moment in Myanmar

According to Asia Times, Myanmar appears to be looking elsewhere for inspiration and ideas. In July this year, a parliamentary delegation from Myanmar led by speaker Shwe Mann visited Russia as part of a "fact finding mission" on Russia's democracy model.

“Given their wariness of democracy in the first place and particularly one that is argumentative and noisy like that in neighboring India, Myanmar's rulers, who have often spoken in favor of a ‘disciplined democracy’ are looking to Russia for ideas….,” says the report.

Considering the state of democracy in India, you couldn’t fault the Myanmarese for looking elsewhere. As long as Myanmar is being weaned off both Beijing and Islamabad, New Delhi should count its blessings.

Related

• India, Russia and Abe’s posturing
• Moving beyond ‘conflict of civilizations’ to multi-polar equilibrium
• Russia praises results of African Union Summit

Is Japan Losing its Independence?

Record Trade Deficit in Japan and Nuclear Reality: Is Japan Losing its Independence?

Noriko Watanabe and Walter Sebastian

Ex: http://moderntokyotimes.com

The anti-nuclear lobby in Japan and the mass media in this nation on a whole continue to focus on the negative side of nuclear power stations. Not surprisingly, the government of Japan is dithering about this issue just like other important areas – for example the declining birth rate. However, Japan can’t afford to maintain its current energy policy because it is hindering the economy too much. Either Japan must re-focus on nuclear energy which helped in the modernization of this nation in the post-war period – or, Japan must bite the bullet and formulate an alternative energy policy and quickly.

The Ministry of Finance announced earlier this week that the trade deficit in 2013 reached a record figure. This should set off alarm bells in the corridors of power because the $112 billion dollar trade deficit will put enormous strains on the economy. After all, with no real energy policy existing currently in Japan, then it seem more than feasible that the next few years will follow the same pattern.

Issues related to the nuclear crisis in Japan appear to have been blown up out of all proportion. After all, the huge loss of life occurred because of the brutal tsunami that followed the massive 9.0-magnitude earthquake on March 11 in 2011. This isn’t meant to belittle the trauma caused to the local area in Fukushima because within a certain zone it is clear that problems continue to exist. However, the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear crisis is more based on bad management, the age of the plant, deficiencies within the planning mechanisms of this nuclear plant, lack of accountability, limited safety mechanisms – and other areas of importance. Of course, the earthquake triggered the tsunami but the nuclear crisis that erupted was based on human failure when faced with the brutal reality of nature.

Vojin Joksimovich, nuclear specialist and writer at Modern Tokyo Times, stated last year: “Japan has few natural resources and imports about 84% of its energy requirements. Nuclear power has been a national strategic priority since 1973. The country’s 54 nuclear plants have provided some 30% of the nation’s electricity. This was expected to increase to 40% by 2017 and to 50% by 2030. Japan has a fuel cycle capability including enrichment and reprocessing of used fuel for recycle and waste minimization. Shutdowns of 48 units capable of generating electricity have resulted in soaring fossil fuel, mostly LNG imports. Five nuclear utilities have been compelled to raise electricity rates: household rates 8.5-11.9%; commercial rates 14.2-19.2%.” 

“According to the NASA climate change study, summarized in the May 2013 issue of the Nuclear News, using nuclear power to generate electricity instead of burning fossil fuels prevented an average of 1.84 million air pollution deaths and 64 billion metric tons of CO2- equivalent greenhouse gas emissions between 1971 and 2009. In the time frame 2000-2009 the nuclear plants prevented on average 76,000 deaths/year. It appears that the NRA has ignored these types of considerations, while pursuing the absolute safety quest for the nuclear plants.” 

In the same article Vojin Joksimovich says: “There is now abundance of evidence showing that the worst accident in the history of commercial nuclear power has not harmed the Japanese public. The University of Oxford physics professor Wade Allison, author of the remarkable book Radiation and Reason: The Impact of Science on a Culture of Fear, testifying in the British House of Commons in December of 2011, was the first one to tell the world that the accident has not harmed the Japanese public: “No acute fatalities, no acute injuries, no extended hospitalizations due to radiation, unlikely cancer fatalities in 50 years.”

“World Health Organization (WHO) report followed: “Low risk to population, no observable health effects.”United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) report, with contributions from 80 international experts, says: “No immediate health effects, unlikely health effects in future among general public and vast majority of workers.” Most Japanese were exposed to additional radiation less than natural background level of 2.1mSv/yr. The report concludes that observable effects are attributable to stresses of evacuation and unwarranted fear of radiation. This means that the most serious health effects were not caused by radiation but by fear of it by the Japanese authorities. Lastly the Fukushima Medical University (FMU) is conducting a health management survey of all 2 million Fukushima Prefecture residents. Thus far the maximum dose received was only 19mSv. This writer, while in a local hospital, has received doses of 30-40mSv from CT scans. It means that he has received higher dose than ~99% of the Japanese population from the Daiichi accident.”

Now Japan is stuck by either adopting a pragmatic nuclear policy based on modernizing the entire system and implementing tougher standards – or to continue with importing dirty energy at a negative cost in terms of health related issues and hindering the economy. Of course, Japan could try to radically alter its energy policy by implementing a policy that boosts alternative energy – the effects and costs remain debatable. However, the current status quo of relying on expensive imported fossil fuels to bridge the non-existent energy policy isn’t viable.

The huge deficit is based on increasing imports that followed in the wake of the March 11 9.0-magnitude earthquake that triggered the tsunami and nuclear crisis in Fukushima. Since this period, imports continue to rise in relation to the demand of fossil fuels. Therefore, despite exports rising in Japan to nearly 10% in 2013, it is clear that the import imbalance, weak yen and the reliance on fossil fuels are all hitting the economy hard.

Forbes says: “A surge in Japanese fossil fuel demand following the Fukushima nuclear crisisin 2011 pushed imports to their highest-ever level of 81.26 trillion yen.”

“In other words, steep post-Fukushima energy bills are taking a toll on Japan’s economy.”

“Prior to the Fukushima fiasco, nuclear reactors supplied a third of Japan’s electric demand.”

Lee Jay Walker at Modern Tokyo Times says: “The yen will continue to feel the effects of the current account deficit and if this isn’t addressed then traders may well sell off more yen. This in turn will have an adverse effect on import costs thereby creating a downward economic spiral. Therefore, given the reality that exports reached a near 10% increase last year, it is clear that Japan needs to address its energy policy along with other essential areas related to the economy.”

Akira Amari, Fiscal and Economic Policy Minister, is extremely anxious about the deficit. He warns that unless this issue is addressed then Japan “may become like the United States in depending on other countries for its financial funds.”

If the above scenario happens then Japan will further lose its independence and this also applies to the nuclear angle. After all, the development of the nuclear sector was an area of self-reliance given the overall weakness of Japan in relation to natural energy resources. Now, however, Japan is beholden to more imported fossil fuels; the nation relies on America for protecting the nation state in relation to the armed forces of this nation being stationed in Japan; while imported foodstuffs are a natural fact of life; and if the trade deficit continues then soon Japan may rely on foreign nations for funds. Therefore, the current leader of Japan needs to focus on a proper energy policy because the current status quo is undermining the economy along with other negative ills.

Lee Jay Walker gave guidance to both main writers

http://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2014/01/27/the-cost-of-misguided-energy-policies-japans-record-trade-deficit/

http://www.moderntokyotimes.com/2013/07/16/restart-of-japanese-nuclear-plants-politically-correct-radiophobia-harms-the-general-public/

[e-mail]

http://moderntokyotimes.com

Les Ainu et la politique des minorités ethniques au Japon

Les Ainu et la politique des minorités ethniques au Japon

par Rémy VALAT

« Le Japon est un peuple ethniquement et culturellement homogène », telle est l’idée dominante, héritée de la mythologie et de l’idéologie politiques modernes – qui a longtemps prévalu dans ce pays. À ce titre, pendant la période d’expansion coloniale en Asie (1895 – 1945), les populations ethniquement non japonaises ont été assimilées par la force (les habitants des îles Ryûkyû – l’actuelle préfecture d’Okinawa – et les Ainu) ou réduites au travail forcé (Coréens). D’autres minorités sont le résultat des migrations internationales contemporaines et de divisions culturelles au sein même de la société japonaise.

 

Survol sur les minorités au Japon

 

Le Japon est le « pays des dieux », un pays unique peuplé par une race homogène : une interprétation courante des groupes ethniques et des nations souhaitant se singulariser par rapport aux autres. Cette vision est défendue par les politiques et longtemps soutenue par la communauté scientifique qui défendait la thèse d’une « japonéité » se fondant sur une explication biologique, servant de prétexte à une appartenance communautaire reposant sur le « droit du sang ».

 

Toutefois, il existe des disparités au sein même de la population de même sang, une « caste » a pendant longtemps été reléguée : les Burakumin (ou « gens des hameaux » – sous-entendu « spéciaux »). Les personnes (et leurs collatéraux) exerçant des métiers « impurs » d’un point de vue religieux, parce qu’en relation avec la chair morte ou la mort, voire pour le caractère itinérant de leur profession (forains), ont été mises au ban de la société (comme les comédiens ou les bourreaux de la société française d’Ancien Régime). La discrimination à l’encontre de ces individus est en voie de disparition. D’autres Japonais, les victimes des bombes atomiques américaines, ont aussi été considérées avec un certain mépris, comme l’attesterait des enquêtes menées sur les demandes en mariage ou les demandes d’aides sociales (travail, assurance maladie), peut-être en raison de la visibilité de leurs blessures, qui serait une sorte de rappel d’un passé que l’on souhaiterait oublier.

 

La logique des vertus de l’homogénéité ethnique a été mise à mal par l’expérience d’un retour au pays de descendants d’émigrants japonais, les « personnes de lignée japonaise » (Nikkeijin). Ces derniers ont bénéficié – pendant la phase de reconstruction et d’essor économique de l’après-guerre – d’une politique favorable d’immigration, en réalité une politique officieuse d’immigration choisie. Ils seraient, à l’heure actuelle, environ 700 000 résidents permanents. Beaucoup sont revenus d’Amérique latine (principalement du Brésil), où ils ont servi de main-d’œuvre dans les plantations de café, des États-Unis, où ils ont été victimes de sévères lois sur l’immigration et – après la déclaration de guerre avec le Japon – de persécutions et d’internement dans des camps, et des Philippines. Ces « Japonais de sang » ont également été soumis, à leur arrivée, à un statut particulier (titre de résident temporaire, logement dans des quartiers réservés) et connaissent de nos jours une crise d’identité, mais aussi des difficultés d’insertion, notamment du fait de leur acculturation et, parfois d’une maîtrise insuffisante de la langue.

 

Avec les Ainu, objet de cet article, les 1,4 million d’habitants des îles Ryûkyû (actuelle préfecture d’Okinawa, annexée en 1879, puis occupée par l’armée étatsunienne entre 1945 et 1972) ont aussi bénéficié d’un statut particulier, parce que peuple autochtone. Engagés dans la lutte pour la rétrocession de l’île au Japon, les habitants d’Okinawa ont vu leur niveau de vie nettement amélioré, bien qu’encore inférieur à celui des autres préfectures japonaises.

 

La principale minorité issue de l’immigration est d’origine coréenne (700 000 personnes en 2005), qualifiés de « Ceux qui sont au Japon » (Zainichi). Cette communauté est venue sur le sol national japonais, lors de l’annexion de leur pays (1910 – 1945). Traités avec mépris, ces travailleurs – d’abord volontaires – puis soumis au travail obligatoire vivaient dans des espaces réservés (buraku) et ont mêmes été victimes de massacres collectifs : en 1923, dans les circonstances difficiles du tremblement de terre, bon nombre ont été tués par les Tôkyôites qui les ont accusés d’avoir empoisonné l’eau de consommation courante. Pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, ils seront enrôlés de force, selon un système proche du Service du travail obligatoire allemand (S.T.O.). En 1945, plus de 2 millions de Coréens retourneront dans la péninsule, 600 000 resteront au Japon, mais privés de nationalité jusqu’en 1965 (ils deviendront « Sud-Coréens » en 1965). Le Japon compte aussi une minorité chinoise, d’immigrants venus des pays littoraux ou insulaires de l’Océan Indien et du Pacifique et un faible nombre de ressortissants des pays occidentaux, principalement nord-américains.

 

Ce tableau mérite cependant d’être nettement tempéré, car depuis l’ouverture du Japon sur le monde et la pacification de ces mœurs politiques en Asie, ce pays, doté d’une Constitution réellement démocratique, est progressivement devenu une terre d’accueil pour les étrangers (principalement asiatiques, des Chinois et des Coréens, soit 57 % des résidents étrangers au Japon), en raison du changement des mentalités et du besoin d’immigration, engendré par le vieillissement de la population : les étrangers représentent 2 % de la population totale, et leur nombre a augmenté de 50 % depuis le début du deuxième millénaire. Les nouveaux venus sans qualifications ou ne maîtrisant pas la langue sont, comme dans tous les pays économiquement développés, bien souvent réduits aux tâches les moins valorisantes ou les plus pénibles (ce sont les trois « K » : kitsui, pénible; kitanai, sale; kiken, dangereux), mais de réelles possibilités d’intégration – y compris l’adoption de la nationalité japonaise – existent pour eux. Chaque année, 42 000 nouvelles unions, soit 6 % des mariages annuels au Japon, sont le fait de couples internationaux (dans 80 % des cas, l’époux est Japonais). Dans la réalité, le regard porté par les Japonais sur les minorités asiatiques a changé, en dépit de la persistance de discriminations réelles. Le Japon paraît être en transition et s’adapter avec prudence aux réalités migratoires, corollaire de la troisième mondialisation.

 

La culture ainu : origines et principales caractéristiques

 

L’origine des populations ainu serait Préhistorique : elle remonterait à la période Jômon (voir notre article sur ce sujet), et son origine exacte reste encore incertaine. Certains individus sont parfois morphologiquement différents des hommes de la période Jômon, leurs phénotypes ayant des caractéristiques pouvant les rattacher aux populations caucasiennes. La culture Jômon sera progressivement subjuguée par une nouvelle vague de migrants venue du continent à la période Yayoi (Ve siècle av. J.-C. – IIIe siècle ap. J.-C.), importatrice de technologies (riziculture et métallurgie) et d’une culture nouvelles : leurs descendants sont les Japonais. Les populations constitutives de la culture ainu étaient implantés dans la zone septentrionale insulaire de Hokkaidô, de Tôhoku, des Kouriles, de Sakhaline et du sud de la péninsulaire du Kamtchakta. Les spécialistes penchent désormais pour la cœxistence de plusieurs groupes ethniques différents répartis dans la partie septentrionale du Japon actuel : les Emishi (voir infra) – repoussés par les Japonais – venus du Nord du Tôhoku et du Sud-Ouest de Hokkaidô- se seraient amalgamés avec les populations existantes (Ashihase).

 

Au VIIIe siècle, les ethnies ainu se répartissent sur les îles Kouriles et Sakhaline. Dans les premières annales du Japon (le Kojiki et le Nihongi ou Nihonshoki), ces derniers sont dépeints comme appartenant à une ethnie différente, farouche et sont qualifiés de différents ethnonymes (dont celui d’Emishi) faisant référence à leur pilosité corporelle abondante. Ces populations se qualifient elles-mêmes de Ainu, qui signifie  : « être humain ».

 

La langue ainu est radicalement différente du japonais (qui appartient au groupe des langues altaïques – à l’instar du turc, du mongol, du toungouse et du coréen) aussi bien d’un point de vue syntaxique, phonologique, morphologique que du vocabulaire (comme la langue basque dans le Sud-Ouest de la France et en Espagne). Enfin, la culture ainu est une tradition orale, son système d’écriture repose sur des translittérations empruntées aux langues des civilisations russes (alphabet cyrillique) et japonaises (katakana). Plusieurs dialectes la composent, mais une langue commune, véhiculaire était compréhensible par tous les membres de la communauté, parce que réservée à la transmission culturelle, notamment des mythes. La langue ainu est en voie d’extinction, peut-être une quinzaine de locuteurs l’utiliseraient de nos jours.

 

La culture ainu a hérité de nombreuses pratiques de la période protohistorique, notamment le tatouage, les fondements de la religion, la chasse, mais avec une évolution singulière dans le temps, constitutrice d’une « identité ». La société ainu est restée pendant longtemps traditionnelle et proche de la nature : ce « retard » technologique par rapport à la Russie et au Japon l’a – à terme – marginalisée.

 

Les Ainu face à la colonisation japonaise dans un contexte politique et économique d’expansion impériale (1869 – 1945)

 

Les Ainu se trouvaient, du point du vue des gouvernements successifs japonais, au-delà du « limes ». Si les clans du Tôhoku (Nord-Est de l’île d’Honshû) ont finalement adopté la culture dominante, les autres groupes ont longtemps offert une âpre résistance au front pionnier japonais. Dès la période de Heian, les marches de l’État japonais étaient administrées par un officier supérieur, chargé de soumettre les Emishi : le shôgun. Au XVe siècle, les Japonais commencent à s’implanter dans le Sud-Ouest de Hokkaidô (Ezochi, appellation ainu) et à repousser les populations locales vers le nord, mais celles-ci parviennent à faire refluer l’invasion, puis à renouer des relations économiques avec le Japon.

 

À l’époque d’Edo (1600 – 1867), la politique de fermeture adoptée par le shôgunat ne s’applique pas aux Ainu : ces derniers commercent abondamment avec les Chinois et les Russes. Mais, la progression russe d’Ouest en Est à travers l’Asie centrale vient se heurter aux intérêts japonais : les enjeux se cristallisent autour du contrôle de l’île Ezo (ancienne appellation de Hokkaidô). Le Bakufu renforce son emprise sur l’île en détruisant la résistance des populations autochtones (bataille de Knashiri-Menashi, 1789) : l’île est économiquement exploitée par le Japon, notamment pour la production d’engrais de harengs.

 

Une rupture s’opère au XVIIIe siècle, l’invasion russe du Nord des îles Kouriles et de Sakhaline (à partir de 1730) pousse le gouvernement japonais à poursuivre une politique d’assimilation des peuples indigènes pour justifier sa revendication territoriale (un traité russo-nippon fixe la frontière entre les deux États, traité de Shimoda, 1854 : la ligne de partage séparant les deux empires se situant entre les îles d’Urup et d’Etorofu, voir notre article sur le sujet).

 

La restauration impériale (1868) et l’essor économique et industriel sont accompagnés d’un accroissement de la population japonaise : bon nombre d’insulaires partent s’installer à l’étranger, notamment en Amérique du Sud. En 1869, l’île de Hokkaidô est annexée à l’Empire et la colonisation favorisée (une commission de colonisation est créée); en 1886, l’île devient une préfecture, avec un statut particulier. Les Ainu sont rapidement soumis à un régime d’exception, leur interdisant toute activité culturelle (tatouages, pratiques funéraires, etc.) et économique traditionnelle (pêche, chasse). La situation connaît une aggravation, lorsqu’un nouveau traité russo-japonais rattache toutes les îles Kouriles au Japon, en échange de l’actuelle Sakhaline (1875). Les Ainu de Sakhaline sont contraints de rejoindre Hokkaidô, où ils sont cantonnés dans des réserves.

 

La politique cœrcitive japonaise vise à transformer la population, paupérisée par l’accaparement des terres par des colons japonais, en agriculteurs. Une politique volontariste d’assimilation, oblige les enfants des familles ainu à se rendre dans des écoles spécifiques où les enseignements sont dispensés en langue japonaise, les mariages mixtes sont encouragés. Par ailleurs, la colonisation a des effets ravageurs sur les autochtones, marqués psychologiquement, d’aucuns sombrent dans l’alcool, d’autres périssent des maladies importées par les immigrants nippons.

 

Les Ainu sont peu à peu soumis à un statut particulier. La commission de Colonisation adopte officiellement le terme de kyudojin, qui signifie « anciens aborigènes » (1878). Plus tard, en 1899, une loi est votée par les représentants japonais pour « protéger » les Ainu, considérés comme une « race primitive sur le déclin ». La politique coloniale japonaise se calque ainsi sur la pensée occidentale, notamment les théories évolutionnistes alors en vogue, et mise au service d’une politique expansionniste. Les Ainu et leurs territoires sont devenus une sorte de musée, de « zoo humain » (déjà vu sous d’autres tropiques), que viennent étudier et photographier les anthropologues occidentaux : des Ainu sont mêmes présentés aux expositions internationales de Chicago (1904) et de Londres (1910)…

 

Les Ainu vivent dans une situation de grande précarité, et ce n’est pas l’exode massif de population de la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale (1,5 million de Japonais supplémentaires se rendent sur l’île d’Hokkaidô, poussés par l’avancée soviétique en extrême-Orient et dans les îles Kouriles) qui permit d’apporter une amélioration à leur sort…

 

La politique coloniale japonaise est, nous l’avons dit, une appropriation et une adaptation des politiques coloniales européennes. Les autorités japonaises, nous l’avons vu, se sont octroyés le « pouvoir de nommer » la population cible, afin de l’individualiser et d’en souligner l’altérité, voire de la « dévaloriser » (la référence à la pilosité et le statut d’aborigène, voir supra). Cette qualification (1878) a été une étape déterminante à la création d’un statut singulier (1899) justifiant les pratiques discriminatoires et répressives, processus que l’on retrouve dans toutes les colonisations. Le statut de kyudojin n’est pas sans rappeler celui de l’indigénat dans les colonies françaises d’Afrique ou celui des Indiens d’Amérique du Nord.

 

Ces mesures administratives sont à l’origine d’un mouvement de défense de la part des populations ainu, même si certains, convertis au christianisme, espèrent que l’assimilation leur permettra d’obtenir une égalité de droit avec les Japonais. En 1930, un mouvement associatif voit le jour et réclame la révision de la « loi discriminatoire » de 1899. En outre, le processus de démocratisation enclenché après la défaite du Japon (1945) créé un climat plus favorable pour le mouvement revendicatif, qui peut notamment faire référence à l’article 13 de la Constitution qui rendent illégales la discrimination et l’assimilation du peuple ainu.

 

Les nouvelles représentations du peuple ainu : l’acquisition d’une reconnaissance officielle sous regard international

(1945 à nos jours)

 

Les années 1960 marquent un tournant. Pendant cette période encore, l’image des Ainu est instrumentalisée : les guides touristiques, notamment francophone, décrivent les populations locales comme « une race frappée d’impuissance » (guide Nagel, 1964); des scientifiques japonais vont même jusqu’à leur nier toute aptitude technique propre (ce qu’invalide les découvertes archéologiques actuelles). À la fin de la décennie, en pleine phase contestataire au Japon (mouvements des habitants et mouvements contre les discriminations) et dans le monde (Mai 1968), les associations de défense de la communauté ainu donnent de la voix par des actions symboliques (protestations contre la commémoration du centenaire de la colonisation de Hokkaidô, notamment).

 

En 1968, le gouvernement japonais fait un pas en faveur de la communauté en révisant partiellement la loi de 1899 (sans en modifier le caractère discriminatoire) et en proposant des aides sociales.  S’inspirant des mouvements de revendications des peuples autochtones de par le monde et des mouvements anti-colonialistes de libération nationale, le mouvement revendicatif ainu adopte une stratégie internationale, se fondant sur la charte internationale des droits de l’Homme.

 

L’association des revendications à ces valeurs universelles oblige le gouvernement japonais, en pleine expansion économique bâtie sur une représentation pacifique du pays, à signer la Convention internationale sur l’élimination de toutes les formes de discrimination raciale (1978) et le Pacte international sur les droits civils et politiques (1979) et à reconnaître les droits des minorités. Mais l’existence de ces dernières est niée, le Premier ministre Nakasone Yasuhiro ayant officiellement rappelé le caractère mono-ethnique du pays (1986). En 1987, des représentants de la communauté ainu sont admis au groupe de travail des Nations unies, ayant entamé une réflexion sur le sort des peuples autochtones : il en résulte, en 1989, que le gouvernement japonais établit un comité en charge d’examiner les différents points d’une future loi concernant le peuple ainu.

 

Placé sous les projecteurs de la communauté internationale, Tôkyô finit par attribuer le statut de minorité ethnique aux Ainu et l’image de ces derniers commence à évoluer favorablement au yeux de l’opinion japonaise : en 1994, Kayano Shigeru (1926 – 2006), un des responsables du mouvement de revendication entre au Sénat; en 1997, le gouvernement japonais abolit l’appellation de kyudojin et adopte une loi de valorisation de la culture ainu (loi sur le développement de la culture ainu et la diffusion et l’instruction de la connaissance concernant la tradition ainu). Cette loi fait suite à un contentieux administratif autour du projet de construction d’un barrage sur un site sacré ainu : le rendu de la cour de justice de Sapporo ayant reconnu le caractère sacré du lieu et rappelé les carences du gouvernement japonais en matière de protection de l’héritage culturel des Ainu, cette décision a pesé sur l’adoption de la loi de 1997. C’est le premier texte reconnaissant une minorité ethnique au Japon. La législation offre désormais la possibilité aux multiples manifestations culturelles d’être subventionnées, mais ne prend spécifiquement en charge les problèmes socio-économiques de la population cible et aucune autonomie politique n’est accordée (elle n’est d’ailleurs pas recherchée par les intéressés). Le gouvernement revendique toujours sa totale légitimité sur l’île d’Hokkaidô : le centre de promotion de la culture ainu, qui a ouvert ses portes à Sapporo en 2003 est administré par des fonctionnaires japonais et lors du classement de la péninsule de Shiretoko à l’inventaire du patrimoine naturel mondial, aucune référence n’a été faite à la culture ainu, à laquelle cette langue de terre doit le nom. Enfin, le 6 juin 2008, une résolution, approuvée par la Diète, invite le gouvernement à reconnaître le peuple ainu, comme indigènes du Japon et à hâter la fin des discriminations, la résolution reconnaît le peuple ainu comme un « peuple indigène, avec un langage, une religion et une culture différente et abroge la loi de 1899.

 

D’après des enquêtes menées par l’association de défense de la culture ainu (Tari), les Ainu seraient encore victimes de discriminations scolaires (présence moindre sur les bancs universitaires) ou sociales (mariage). Cependant les mentalités et le regard porté sur les Ainu continuent de changer, notamment par le truchement des découvertes archéologiques, qui mettent en avant les peuples de la période Jômon, replacés dans une perspective et un environnement asiatiques (voir notre article sur le sujet). Des expositions internationales, un projet de parc culturel et même des artistes d’origine ainu (l’acteur Ukaji Takashi, le musicien Kano Oki) défendent et cherchent à valoriser leur culture. Des citoyens, issus de la génération d’enfants nés de couples mixtes, essayent de découvrir (pour ceux qui le découvrent) leurs origines, occultées par les parents. Cependant,  le film d’animation Princesse Mononoké (1997), réalisé par Hayao Miyazaki, fait implicitement référence aux traditions ainu, mais sans les manifester ouvertement. Mais, depuis peu (30 octobre 2011), un mouvement de militants ainu se lance dans la vie politique institutionnelle avec à sa tête, Kayano Shiro, le fils de l’ancien responsable ainu, Kayano Shigeru, et pour objectif l’instauration d’une société multiculturelle et multi-ethnique au Japon.

 

Conclusions

 

L’idée japonaise d’une société ethniquement homogène est battue en brèche, parce que pure construction politique et idéologique. Avant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, le rapport aux minorités reposait sur le rapport de force, la création d’un statut, l’assimilation et l’exploitation économique forcée. Hanté par la crainte de la dégénérescence raciale et aveuglé par le succès de l’expansion coloniale qu’ils attribuent à la supériorité de leur « race» en Asie, le Japon s’est enfermé dans une idéologie et une politique impérialiste, qui a conduit le pays à la défaite. Il est flagrant de relever qu’après un conflit multiséculaire contre les Emishi et les Ainu, c’est précisément au XIXe siècle – alors que le Japon s’ouvre aux technologies, aux économies et aux cultures de l’Occident – que ce pays en s’en appropriant certaines de ses valeurs, s’est donné les moyens d’une politique impériale à destination de l’Asie et des territoires proches revendiqués par lui (Hokkaidô, îles Ryukyu et péninsule coréenne).

 

L’objectif était ouvertement – pour les populations des îles périphériques – l’assimilation, car d’un point de vue juridique, le Japon ne reconnaissait, jusqu’à la résistance civique des Ainu, qu’une seule ethnie. Les difficultés rencontrées par les Nikkeijin dans leur intégration, a démontré que l’appartenance à un groupe sur le seul critère biologique (l’innée), est une interprétation erronée minimisant l’importance des facteurs culturels (l’acquis).

 

Même si à l’heure actuelle, les minorités ne sont toujours pas juridiquement considérées comme faisant partie intégrante de la société, car ne possédant pas les attributs de la japonité, la société japonaise change : les signes d’acceptation des minorités (officieuses et de la minorité officielle ainu) sont visibles dans les média et au quotidien. En outre, les conditions d’accès à la citoyenneté japonaise prennent les formes intelligentes, pragmatiques et prudentes d’une immigration choisie (comme remède au vieillissement programmé de la population). Enfin, émane du pays une image pacifiée et positive, que l’on retrouve dans les médias occidentaux et sur Internet (le « Cool Japan », politique internationale pacifique, etc.), qui font de ce pays, probablement un des seuls réellement démocratique en Asie, une terre d’accueil pour de nouveaux immigrants, à condition que ceux-ci fassent un effort réel d’intégration (ce qui est au demeurant la moindre des choses…).

 

Rémy Valat

 

Orientations bibliographiques :

 

• Batchelor John, Sympathetic Magic of the Ainu. The Native people of Japan, Folklore History Series, reprint 2010.

 

• Beillevaire Patrick, « Okinawa : disparition et renaissance d’un département », in Le Japon contemporain, Dir. Jean-Marie Bouissou, Fayard, C.E.R.I., 2007.

 

• Dallais Philippe, « Hokkaidô : le peuple Ainu, ou l’ambivalence de la diversité culturelle au Japon », in Le Japon contemporain, Dir. Jean-Marie Bouissou, Fayard, C.E.R.I., 2007.

 

• Ethnic groups in Japan, including Ainu people, Ryukyuan people, Emishi, foreign-born Japanese, Dekasegi, Yamato people, Gaijin, Chinese people in Japan, Brazilians in Japan, Aterui, Indians in Japan, Peruvians in Japan, Burmese people in Japan, Hephaestus Books, 2011, (Une impression des sources Wikipédia disponibles sur le sujet).

 

• Kayano Shigeru, The Ainu. A story of Japan’s Original People, Tuttle Publishing, 1989.

 

• Pelletier Philippe, Atlas du Japon. Une société face à la post-modernité, Autrement, 2008.

 

• Poutignat Philippe et Streiff-Fenart Jocelyne, Théories de l’ethnicité, Presses universitaires de France, coll. « Quadrige », avril 2008.

 

• Reischauer Edwin O., Histoire du Japon et des Japonais. Des origines à 1945, Seuil, coll. « Points Histoire », 1988.

 

• Yamamoto Hadjime, Rapport japonais. Les minorités en droit public interne au Japon, en ligne à l’adresse suivante : www.bibliojuridica.org/libros/4/1725/45.pdf

 

---

 

Article printed from Europe Maxima: http://www.europemaxima.com

 

URL to article: http://www.europemaxima.com/?p=3482

Thaïlande: une révolte contre l’emprise américaine

Bernhard TOMASCHITZ:

Thaïlande: une révolte contre l’emprise américaine

Les désordres qui secouent la Thaïlande sont une révolte contre un gouvernement inféodé aux Etats-Unis qui galvaude le patrimoine national en privatisant les ressources

La capitale thaïlandaise, Bangkok, n’est plus le lieu idyllique que s’imaginent les vacanciers occidentaux. Les batailles de rue se succèdent entre les partisans du gouvernement de la ministre-présidente Yingluck Shinawatra, reconnaissables à leurs chemises rouges, et les opposants à ce gouvernement, généralement vêtus de chemises jaunes. Cinq personnes ont trouvé la mort jusqu’ici. La situation n’est pas prête à se calmer: le chef de l’opposition, Suthep Thaugsuban est fermement décidé à renverser Yingluck Shinawatra, qu’il considère comme une marionette de son frère Thaksin Shinawatra.

Le déclencheur de cette vague de protestations a été une loi d’amnistie fabriquée pour absoudre Thaksin Shinawatra, l’ancien premier ministre thaïlandais, qui vit en exil depuis qu’il a été renversé par les militaires en septembre 2006; en 2008, il a été condamné à la prison pour corruption. L’opposition revendique également de renationaliser le consortium thaïlandais du pétrole PTT. Ce consortium avait été privatisé peu après l’accession au pouvoir de Thaksin Shinawatra en février 2001. Le “Wall Street Journal” écrivait à l’époque: “Le premier ministre thaïlandais Thaksin Shinawatra a fait du processus de privatisation, longtemps bloqué, l’un de ses premiers objectifs économiques. Au cours des trois prochaines années, le gouvernement vendra les actions de 16 entreprises et agences nationales”.

Avant d’entamer sa carrière politique, Shinawatra avait été conseiller du Groupe Carlyle, une des plus grosses entreprises américaines de participation. Il a mis à profit ses expériences professionnelles quand il a commencé sa carrière politique, comme l’écrivait le journaliste Thanong Khantong en 2001 dans le journal thaïlandais en langue anglaise “Nation”: “En avril 1998, lorsque la Thaïlande se trouvait encore dans le marasme économique le plus profond, Thaksin Shinawatra a essayé d’utilser ses liens avec l’Amérique pour peaufiner son image politique, au moment où il fondait son parti le Thai Rak Thai”. Il a notamment invité l’ancien président américain George H. W. Bush et son ministre des affaires étrangères James Baker.

Les Américains ont rapidement reconnu l’importance que pouvait revêtir Shinawatra qui, pour sa part, a su se montrer reconnaissant. En 2003, la Thaïlande a envoyé un contingent de soldats pour perpétrer l’attaque contre l’Irak, contraire au droit des gens. Il a également entamé des pourparlers pour forger un accord de libre-échange entre les Etats-Unis et la Thaïlande. Shinawatra a ensuite tenté d’imposer les conditions de cet accord au pays, en contournant le parlement. Le coup des militaires a empêché la traduction dans la réalité de cet accord.

Celui-ci aurait d’abord profité aux Etats-Unis. Dans un rapport de la Maison Blanche, on peut lire que l’accord de libre-échange “aurait essentiellement profité aux fermiers américains, confrontés aux droits de douane thaïlandais qui, en moyenne, sont de 35% plus élevés que les restrictions extra-tarifaires”. Robert Zoellick, un faucon de l’écurie des néo-conservateurs, qui, à l’époque était le principal des négociateurs américains et est devenu ultérieurement président de la Banque Mondiale, fut l’homme qui força Bangkok à éliminer dans le domaine agricole, “les limitations injustifiables à l’endroit des nouvelles technologies américaines”. Cette formule désigne surtout les organismes génétiquement modifiés. D’après Ernest Bower, le président du “US-ASEAN Business Council”, le traité entre Washington et Bangkok devait constituer “un précédent et un préliminaire” à tous les accords de libre-échange à négocier entre les Etats-Unis et les pays d’Asie du Sud-Est disposant d’un fort secteur agricole. L’“US-ASEAN Business Council” est un lobby qui veut amplifier les relations économiques entre les Etats-Unis et l’association des pays du Sud-Est asiatique. Parmi les 500 entreprises américaines qui sont parties prenantes dans ces négociations, on compte Coca-Cola et Google mais aussi des industries de l’armement comme Lockheed Martin et Northrop Grumman.

L’“US-ASEAN Business Council” est demeuré actif en Thaïlande après la chute de Shinawatra. De concert avec d’autres fondations américaines influentes, comme Freedom House, le Council a soutenu des “mouvements démocratiques” thaïlandais comme l’UDD (“United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship”). Une “Union for Thai Democracy” remercie le Council pour l’avoir soutenu dans une lettre du 26 avril 2011: “Nous avons eu l’occasion de rencontrer ‘Human Rights Watch’, le ‘National Democratic Institute’ [une officine dépendant des Démocrates américains] et l’‘US-ASEAN Business Council’. Nous avons discuté de nombreuses questions (...). Le monde sait désormais, à l’heure de la globalisation, que seule une véritable démocratie peut garantir la stabilité”.

L’intérêt des Américains était que le statu quo demeurât tel quel en Thaïlande. La re-nationalisation du géant pétrolier PTT, que réclame l’opposition actuelle, bouleverserait la situation économique: en effet, le consortium énergétique américain Chevron est l’actionnaire principal de PTT depuis la privatisation de cette entreprise du Sud-Est asiatique. Il faut aussi se rappeler que PTT dispose d’un bon réseau d’oléoducs et de gazoducs. Vu les réserves énergétiques thaïlandaises, ce réseau revêt une importance stratégique considérable. Selon un dossier établi par la CIA, la Thaïlande disposerait de réserves sûres de pétrole estimées à 442 millions de barils et des réserves de gaz équivalant à 8,8 milliards de m3”.

A tout cela s’ajoute la position géostratégique de la Thaïlande et surtout de la presqu’île de Kra, dont la largeur est d’à peine 44 km. Elle sépare l’Océan Indien du Golfe du Siam. La Chine, depuis longtemps, veut creuser un canal au beau milieu de cette presqu’île pour mettre un terme au fameux “dilemme de Malakka”: le détroit de Malakka, contrôlé par des puissances tierces, limite considérablement la marge de manoeuvre des Chinois dans cette zone maritime cruciale. Zhou Fangye, de l’Académie chinoise des sciences sociales, écrivait, fin novembre 2013, dans un journal appartenant à l’Etat chinois, “Global Times”, que le creusement d’un canal “résoudrait automatiquement le ‘dilemme de Malakka’ et permettrait d’éviter le goulot d’étranglement stratégique qui limite l’accès à l’Océan Indien de la puissance maritime chinoise”. A l’inverse, le politologue néo-conservateur américain Robert Kaplan considère que le projet d’un Canal de Kra, vu son importance géostratégique, est comparable au projet du Canal de Panama et “changerait l’équilibre en Asie au profit de la Chine”.

Bernhard TOMASCHITZ.

(article paru dans “zur Zeit”, Vienne, n°50/2013, http://www.zurzeit.at ).

Le développement de la Chine est une déclaration de guerre aux Etats-Unis

Le développement de la Chine est une déclaration de guerre aux Etats-Unis

Par Peter KUNTZE

La Chine a confiance en elle; elle ose des réformes et sa nouvelle direction veut consolider ses succès

Le contraste ne pourrait pas être beaucoup plus grand: d’un côté du Pacifique, la puissance qui est toujours l’hegemon, est confrontée à de fortes turbulences économiques et politiques; de l’autre côté, la superpuissance en devenir bat tous les records sur le plan économique, en dépit des prophètes de malheur, et a pleine confiance en son avenir.

Ce n’est pas étonnant: trois décennies et demie après le lancement de la politique de réformes et d’ouverture voulue par Deng Xiaoping, le successeur de Mao Zedong, ce changement de cap révolutionnaire a donné ses fruits en bien des domaines. Le pauvre Etat paysan, avec ses millions de “fourmis bleues” est devenu un pays moderne aux immeubles de prestige rutilants et a développé une industrie de la mode qui se révèle désormais sur les “catwalks” de Paris et de Milan.

Hollywood aussi s’énerve car, de fait, l’industrie américaine du cinéma a toutes les raisons de craindre l’avènement d’un sérieux concurrent installé en Extrême-Orient. Pourquoi? Wang Jianlin, l’homme qui serait le plus riche de la République Populaire de Chine, est en train de faire construire à Tsingtau (l’ancienne base et colonie allemande) les plus grands studios cinématographiques du monde. Ce projet gigantesque coûterait plus de huit milliards de dollars et serait achevé en 2017.

On pourrait énumérer encore beaucoup de nouvelles de ce genre, qui confirmeraient le développement exponentiel de la Chine actuelle. Pourtant, lorsque la nouvelle direction chinoise a accédé au pouvoir en novembre 2012, les voix se multipliaient pour annoncer le déclin prochain de la Chine, comme ces mêmes voix, d’ailleurs, l’avaient fait pour les directions précédentes. Comme le “New York Times” ou le “Spiegel”, les médias occidentaux étaient à l’unisson pour évoquer des scénarii catastrophiques: une bulle immobilière était sur le point d’éclater, qui aurait été suivie d’une bulle de crédit et, ensuite, le pays croulerait à cause de la corruption, tandis que la pollution le ravagerait et que le peuple ne tolèrerait plus les différences entre riches et pauvres. L’aspiration générale à la liberté ferait tomber la direction communiste, si des réformes rapides et de vaste ampleur n’étaient pas traduites dans le réel et si cette direction ne renonçait pas à son monopole de pouvoir.

Rien de tout cela ne s’est produit depuis que Xi Jinping (chef de l’Etat et du Parti) et Li Keqiang (premier ministre) ont pris leurs fonctions en novembre 2012 pour les conserver pendant dix ans. On ne voit pas pourquoi le chaos politique et la débâcle économique frapperaient la Chine au cours de la décennie à venir, décennie au bout de laquelle la République Populaire, selon l’OCDE, rattraperait les Etats-Unis, en tant que principale puissance économique de la planète. Le nouveau président de la Banque Mondiale, Jim Yong Kim, a prévu pour la Chine un développement positif à la mi-octobre: “La République Populaire croît de manière certes plus lente mais elle poursuit ses réformes. Le pays s’impose une gigantesque transformation: il passe du statut de pays exportateur et investisseur à une économie plus orientée vers la consommation. Sa direction envisage de s’en tenir à cette politique, en dépit des difficultés. C’est là un modèle pour d’autres”.

Deux nouvelles institutions contribueront à consolider la voie choisie par le gouvernement chinois: une première autorité, soumise au cabinet, a reçu, sur décision du Comité Central, la mission “d’éviter les conflits sociaux et de les résoudre de manière efficace”, afin de garantir la sécurité intérieure de l’Etat.

L’émergence de cette autorité vise, d’une part, à résoudre les problèmes qui se profilent derrière les nombreuses protestations et les manifestations parfois violentes qui se sont organisées dans le pays contre les excès de fonctionnaires locaux; d’autre part, à réagir contre d’autres dérapages comme l’attentat récent qui a frappé Pékin. Fin octobre, devant la Porte de la Paix Céleste, trois Ouïghours avaient foncé avec leur voiture bourrée d’essence sur une foule et entraîné deux passants avec eux dans la mort. On ne peut pas affirmer avec certitude qu’il s’agit d’un acte terroriste de facture islamiste, comme l’affirme le gouvernement. Une chose est sûre cependant: au Tibet comme dans la province du Xinjiang, peuplée d’Ouïghours, les incidents se multiplient car les habitants de ces vastes régions se sentent menacés par l’immigration sans cesse croissante de Chinois Han.

La deuxième autorité, qui verra le jour, s’appelle le “Groupe Central de Direction”, et sera soumis au Comité Central du PC chinois. Il supervisera le processus des réformes en cours et à planifier et veillera à leur “approfondissement général”.

Avec ces décisions, que le Comité Central du PC chinois a prises au début de novembre 2013 après quatre jours de délibérations, Xi Jinping et son camarade de combat, l’élégant Li Keqiang, ont imposé leur politique face à la résistance des forces orthodoxes de gauche. En effet, le texte de la résolution parle du marché qui ne tiendra plus un rôle “fondamental” mais bien un rôle “décisif” dans la répartition des ressources. Tant la propriété étatique que la propriété privée sont désormais des composantes essentielles de “l’économie socialiste de marché”.

D’importantes réformes sociales ont également été décidées. Ainsi, la politique d’un enfant par couple sera assouplie afin de mettre un terme au processus de vieillissement démographique qui freine le développement économique. Jusqu’ici les couples résidant en zone urbaine ne pouvaient avoir un deuxième enfant que si les deux parents n’avaient ni frères ni soeurs. Dorénavant, les couples chinois des villes pourront avoir un deuxième enfant si un seul des parents n’a ni frère ni soeur.

On annonce également la suppression des camps de travail où, depuis 1957, les petits délinquents et les adversaires du régime pouvaient être “rééduqués” pour une période allant jusqu’à quatre années, sans décision d’un tribunal.

L’échec du projet de reconstruction chinois, qui serait dû à des désordres intérieurs et devrait survenir au cours de ces prochaines années, est une chimère de plus colportée par les médias occidentaux. Beaucoup de Chinois profitent désormais de la politique gouvernementale. Tout visiteur étranger s’en aperçoit aisément en déambulant dans les rues des villes chinoises: ce ne sont plus que les seuls dirigeants politiques communistes qui circulent en automobile avec chauffeur. Aujourd’hui des millions de Chinois, fiers, sont au volant de leur voiture personnelle neuve de fabrication japonaise, américaine, allemande ou sud-coréenne.

De plus, plus de 90 millions de Chinois se sont rendus cette année à l’étranger. Ce ne sont pas seulement des amoureux du dépaysement mais des champions du “shopping” international. En 2012, les touristes chinois ont dépensé à l’étranger près de 102 milliards de dollars, plus que n’importe quelle autre nation au monde.

Quasiment à l’insu du reste du monde, Pékin vient d’entamer un combat sur le plan énergétique. Selon les médias chinois, le gouvernement prévoit, pour les cinq années à venir, la somme de 280 milliards d’euro pour financer des mesures visant des économies d’énergies et pour diminuer les effets négatifs de la pollution. Cette somme s’ajoute aux 220 milliards déjà investis dans les énergies renouvelables. Plus important encore: à moyen terme, la direction chinoise veut libérer le cours du yuan (la devise chinoise), le coupler éventuellement à l’or, et, ainsi, détrôner le dollar comme devise globale.

Peter KUNTZE.

(article paru dans “Junge Freiheit”, Berlin, n°49/2013; http://www.jungefreiheit.de ).

IL SECOLO CINESE?

IL SECOLO CINESE?

Ex: http://www.eurasi-rivista.org

È uscito il numero XXXII (4-2013) della rivista di studi geopolitici “Eurasia” intitolato:

 

IL SECOLO CINESE?

Ecco di seguito l’elenco degli articoli presenti in questo numero, con un breve riassunto di ciascuno di essi.

 

EDITORIALE

IL SECOLO CINESE? di Claudio Mutti

 

GEOFILOSOFIA

HEGEL E IL FONDAMENTO GEOGRAFICO DELLA STORIA MONDIALE di Davide Ragnolini*

All’interno delle «Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte» del grande filosofo tedesco la riflessione sulla base geografica della storia mondiale trova una significativa collocazione propedeutica alla stessa storia filosofica del mondo, la cui importanza non è stata ancora sufficientemente colta. Hegel poneva a fondamento dello svolgimento storico mondiale il rapporto tra i popoli e la condizione naturale nella quale questi hanno localizzazione. Secondo l’impostazione storico-idealistica di Hegel, tempo e spazio hanno nella storia e geografia universale il loro correlato fenomenico dal quale i popoli avviano la propria esistenza. Da un punto di vista filosofico il rapporto tra spirito e natura costituisce la struttura teoretica portante su cui Hegel basa l’emancipazione di un popolo dalla condizione di mero «ente naturale» a soggetto storico all’interno della storia mondiale. Dal geografo e collega Carl Ritter,il filosofo tedesco ha tratto i princìpi interpretativi per la comprensione delle possibilità di sviluppo che le differenze geografiche offrono ai popoli, la rappresentazione geologica della superficie terrestre, la sua divisione in continente euroafrasiatico ed aree insulari, e infine la contrapposizione tra terra e mare. Questi rappresentano solo alcuni dei molti aspetti della geografia hegeliana, forieri di sviluppi successivi per la teoria geopolitica. 

 

DOSSARIO: IL SECOLO CINESE?

LA REPUBBLICA POPOLARE CINESE: PROFILO E RISORSE a cura della Redazione

La Cina oggi: una panoramica dei dati essenziali e delle dinamiche in atto contribuisce alla comprensione della più grande realtà asiatica.

 

LA NUOVA VIA DELLA SETA di Qi Han

La signora Qi Han è incaricata d’Affari dell’Ambasciata della Repubblica Popolare Cinese in Italia. “Eurasia” la ringrazia per aver gentilmente concesso di pubblicare il testo del discorso da lei pronunciato in occasione del Forum Eurasiatico di Verona (17-18 ottobre 2013). 

RITORNO ALLA VIA DELLA SETA di Giuseppe Cappelluti

 Dal mito alla realtà. Dopo secoli di oblio la Via della Seta, storico ponte tra l’Occidente e la Cina, sta tornando ad essere una direttrice primaria del commercio internazionale. Lungo i suoi itinerari si è tuttavia prefigurata l’ennesima disputa tra eurasiatismo ed euro-atlantismo: da un lato il percorso attraverso Russia e Kazakistan, più rapido e stimolato dal rafforzamento dell’integrazione eurasiatica, dall’altro quello attraverso il Caucaso e il Mar Caspio voluto dall’Unione Europea.

LA CINA PER UN ORDINE MULTIPOLARE di Spartaco A. Puttini

 L’ascesa della Cina si è imposta come una realtà della quale tener conto, in tutte le dimensioni proprie della geopolitica. Ma per coglierne la portata e le conseguenze per la vita internazionale occorre collocarla in un contesto preciso: quello attualmente attraversato dalle relazioni internazionali e caratterizzato dal braccio di ferro in corso tra il tentativo statunitense di imporre al mondo il proprio “dominio a pieno spettro” e l’emergere di un equilibrio di potenza multipolare. Nelle righe che seguono cercheremo di dare sommariamente conto dell’azione politica della Cina popolare su diverse scacchiere (dall’America Latina all’Africa) evidenziandone finalità ed effetti. Di particolare rilievo risulta l’impulso dato allo sviluppo dei rapporti economici Sud-Sud con mutuo beneficio, che promettono di erodere il potere ricattatorio esercitato dalle centrali finanziarie legate all’Angloamerica nei confronti dei paesi in via di sviluppo. Si accennerà al complesso rapporto che viene a stabilirsi concretamente tra l’aspirazione cinese ad una crescita armonica e pacifica e il vincolo sistemico indotto dagli Stati Uniti con la corsa agli armamenti e con il susseguirsi di gravissimi crisi regionali che contribuiscono ad attizzare le tensioni tra le Potenze.                         

 

 LA SECONDA PORTAEREI CINESE di Andrea Fais

La crescita della potenza economica cinese ha avuto principalmente due ripercussioni internazionali. L’una, di carattere commerciale, sta già modificando le dinamiche dei flussi di capitale nel pianeta ed è quella più dibattuta dalla stampa europea ma troppo spesso accentuata, se non deformata da giudizi raramente in sintonia con la realtà dei fatti. L’altra, di carattere strategico, mantiene ritmi di trasformazione più lenti, non tanto per il ritardo con cui la Repubblica Popolare Cinese è giunta ad affrontare nel concreto i temi salienti della guerra informatica e della modernizzazione militare quanto piuttosto per l’enorme potenziale accumulato dal Pentagono nel decennio compreso tra il 1998 e il 2007. Eppure dal momento che le dimensioni commerciale e militare sono interdipendenti, all’inversione di tendenza nella prima potrebbe presto seguirne un’altra nella seconda. Il debutto della prima portaerei cinese, la Liaoning, nel settembre 2012 aveva lanciato un dado sul tavolo: la sfida a quello strapotere aeronavale statunitense che, assieme al primato internazionale del dollaro, costituisce l’architrave dell’egemonia nordamericana sul resto del mondo.

 

LA TRIADE NUCLEARE DELLA REPUBBLICA POPOLARE CINESE di Alessandro Lattanzio

L’arsenale strategico cinese è oggetto di varie congetture. Qui viene presentato un quadro sintetico delle varie stime relative all’arsenale nucleare, dovute ai più importanti enti occidentali di analisi strategica.

 

GLI ALTRI PARTITI NELLA CINA POPOLARE di Giovanni Armillotta

 Le origini, la storia e l’organizzazione dei partiti democratici. Le lotte comuni assieme ai comunisti nell’epopea della liberazione contro i giapponesi, e nella guerra civile nel periodo della dittatura del Guomindang. La collaborazione di essi col Partito Comunista Cinese nell’amministrazione del Paese e le rappresentanze dei partiti indipendenti nelle alte istituzioni statali. Paralleli col sistema partitico della nostra Italia 1945-1994. Nell’articolo è adottato il sistema di traslitterazione Pinyin di nomi e toponimi.

 

LA  QUINTA GENERAZIONE AL POTERE di Sara Nardi

Negli ultimi anni il problema dell’informazione e dei mezzi di comunicazione di massa si è fatto stringente anche in Cina. Come seconda potenza mondiale e come nazione pienamente inserita nel processo di globalizzazione economica e digitale, il colosso asiatico è ormai entrato sotto la lente d’ingrandimento della famigerata osservazione internazionale. Si tratta di una realtà complessa, che spesso risente delle contraddizioni o delle forzature che il punto di vista politico e geografico dell’osservatore reca necessariamente con sé. Tuttavia, è stato lo stesso Xi Jinping ad annunciare un piano di riforme che risolvano in modo più efficace le complicate questioni legate alla corruzione, agli intrecci impropri tra politica e stampa e alla regolamentazione della rete multimediale. Una sfida da cui dipende l’immagine della Cina nel mondo e, dunque, la sua capacità di guadagnare legittimazione e consenso internazionali.

 

HUKOU. LA RESIDENZA IN CINA di Maria Francesca Staiano

La RPC è caratterizzata da un sistema di registrazione permanente della residenza (Hukou) che esclude i residenti non regolari, soprattutto i lavoratori migranti, dal godimento delle prestazioni sociali, come l’accesso ai servizi di istruzione, di sanità, di previdenza sociale e di sicurezza sul lavoro. Ciò ha generato una divaricazione netta tra la popolazione urbana e i migranti che provengono dalle zone rurali. Il sistema dello Hukou deriva da una tradizione storica-culturale antica ed è stato modificato varie volte dal Governo cinese. Oggi, la questione dello Hukou è nell’agenda del terzo plenum del Partito Comunista della RPC e quanto mai attuale. La Cina si trova ad affrontare la sfida di un esercito di lavoratori migranti che, sostenendo l’economia cinese, pretendono gli stessi diritti dei cittadini urbani.

 

MYANMAR: UNA PARTITA ANCORA APERTA? di Stefano Vernole

Lo “sdoganamento” del Myanmar apparentemente favorisce l’intrusione occidentale nell’area del Sud-Est asiatico, ma la stabilizzazione dell’ex Birmania è funzionale agli interessi di sicurezza della Cina. La strategia geoeconomica del PCC appare ancora una volta vincente. Il secolo asiatico vedrà Pechino protagonista?

LA CINA IN ROMANIA di Luca Bistolfi

La Cina è vicina, e molto, anche in Romania. Da anni ormai, semplici cittadini, operai, imprenditori e multinazionali di servizi e infrastrutture provenienti dalla Città Proibita hanno adottato il Paese carpatico quale meta di investimenti a lunga durata. Nel bellum omnium contra omnes i romeni se ne vanno dal loro Paese e ad esser assunti sono i cinesi, sempre più a basso costo e non meno sfruttati. Un risultato, fra i tanti, è che anche le aziende italiane, andate per suonare, sono state suonate. Sempre dai cinesi. E la Romania, ancora una volta, piange.

 

IL TURISMO CINESE DEL XXI SECOLO di Ornella Colandrea

Negli ultimi tre decenni, la Repubblica Popolare Cinese ha adottato politiche e misure che, modificando fortemente la struttura socioeconomica del paese, hanno inaugurato una fase di costante crescita economica. La Cina rappresenta oggi un interessante mercato in  crescente espansione in cui il turismo costituisce uno dei fulcri centrali dell’industria nazionale. Il mercato turistico cinese rappresenta una grande opportunità per l’Europa e per il sistema di offerta italiano in particolare. L’articolo analizza i dati, i ritmi di sviluppo, le tendenze, i profili dei turisti cinesi, individuando criticità e opportunità.

 

IL TURISMO CINESE IN ITALIA di Elena Premoli

Affari, ma non solo: anche più tempo libero, voglia di esplorare il mondo, curiosità sempre crescente, desiderio di evasione, necessità di staccarsi dalla frenetica vita delle grandi megalopoli asiatiche. E, soprattutto, maggiore disponibilità economica. Sono questi alcuni fattori che stanno alla base di un fenomeno  sempre in crescita e che sta raggiungendo cifre davvero importanti. Si tratta del turismo cinese, dei viaggi interni alla Cina o all’estero che sempre più abitanti della Terra di Mezzo decidono di compiere per piacere.  Dove si posiziona il nostro Paese all’interno di questa filiera? Quali passi sono stati già compiuti, da quali sbagli è bene trarre insegnamento e quali piccole accortezze sono richieste agli operatori del settore per accogliere al meglio gli ospiti in arrivo dalla Repubblica Popolare? L’articolo offre un breve excursus sull’evoluzione del fenomeno turistico, andando alle radici della pratica del viaggiare per poi arrivare velocemente ai giorni nostri. Espone alcune cifre che definiscono un’idea generale del fenomeno e si chiude con uno sguardo particolare su quanto è possibile fare per trarre maggiori guadagni da tale tendenza, impossibile da trascurare.

LA RICEZIONE DI CARL SCHMITT IN CINA di Davide Ragnolini

La recente traduzione in cinese delle opere del giurista tedesco e la crescita delle pubblicazioni dedicategli in Cina rappresentano un elemento di novità sotto un duplice punto di vista. Da un lato contribuiscono sul piano ermeneutico ad arricchire la storia della ricezione della filosofia schmittiana del diritto sotto un più generale aspetto teoretico-dottrinale nel dibattito scientifico mondiale; dall’altro, queste pubblicazioni sono rilevanti come inedita introduzione di un autore europeo ormai classico all’interno della specificità politico-culturale della più grande nazione asiatica. Un recente saggio di Qi Zheng fornisce una panoramica su questo dibattito scientifico in Cina e al contempo ci dà la possibilità di intravedere i limiti attuali della ricezione cinese di un pensatore che, come spiega la stessa Qi Zheng, come nessun altro ha causato tante controversie in Cina.

CONTINENTI

GLOBALIZZAZIONE: DEFINIZIONE E CONSEGUENZE di Cristiano Procentese

La globalizzazione costituisce il fenomeno più rilevante degli ultimi decenni: ingrediente ormai irrinunciabile di ogni riflessione, rimane, ciononostante, un concetto ancora generico e impreciso. Tuttavia, dopo le apologetiche profezie dei sostenitori della globalizzazione, il risultato degli ultimi anni è  stato un modello di sviluppo che ha come componente intrinseca l’accentuazione delle diseguaglianze, la precarizzazione del lavoro ed il senso d’insicurezza dei cittadini. La crescita incontrollata della speculazione finanziaria, la delocalizzazione delle imprese, che diventano multinazionali o transnazionali, e l’impotenza dei governi nazionali nel gestire un fenomeno così complesso, sono le priorità cui la politica, riappropriandosi delle proprie prerogative, dovrebbe cercare di dare una risposta.

LA LETTONIA VERSO L’EURO di Giuseppe Cappelluti

Il 1 gennaio 2014 sarà una data storica per la Lettonia: il Paese baltico, infatti, diventerà il diciottesimo membro di Eurolandia. Per ragioni sia economiche sia geopolitiche (la volontà di sancire l’appartenenza all’Occidente in funzione antirussa) l’adozione dell’euro è stata uno dei principali obiettivi del governo di centrodestra, ma il Paese è tutt’altro che entusiasta. L’accettazione della Lettonia nell’Eurozona, dopo tutto, è stata vincolata all’adozione di rigide misure di austerità, e non manca chi, memori dei cinquant’anni di occupazione sovietica, teme per la propria sovranità nazionale. Alcuni economisti, d’altro canto, non vedono di buon occhio alcuni provvedimenti recentemente approvati in materia fiscale e temono che il Paese si trasformi in un ponte verso i paradisi fiscali, o peggio che diventi esso stesso un paradiso fiscale.

LE MANI SULL’ASIA CENTRALE di Giuseppe Cappelluti

La Cina è oggi uno dei maggiori interlocutori commerciali degli “stan” dell’Asia Centrale, e i suoi interessi nell’area sono in forte crescita. Emblematici delle strategie geopolitiche di Pechino verso il Centrasia sono i rapporti con Kazakhstan e Kirghizistan. Se fino a poco più di vent’anni fa la Cina era totalmente assente dagli orizzonti kazachi, la sempre più massiccia presenza cinese nell’economia dell’Aquila della Steppa, non più limitata al tradizionale settore degli idrocarburi, ne ha fatto uno dei più importanti partner commerciali e strategici. Inoltre, pur non mancando timori per un possibile boom dell’immigrazione cinese, gli interessi tra i due Paesi sono reciproci, a partire dalle questioni legate alla sicurezza e dalle nuove infrastrutture che collegheranno Cina e Russia attraverso il Kazakhstan. Il Kirghizistan, al contrario, interessa essenzialmente per la sua posizione geografica, mentre la sua futura adesione all’Unione Doganale non è propriamente una buona notizia per quello che un tempo fu il Celeste Impero. Ma nei due Paesi le mosse cinesi suscitano non pochi sospetti: legittimi interessi o espansionismo geoeconomico?

LA GUERRA CIVILE DEL TAGIKISTAN (1992-1997) di Andrea Forti

Nonostante la durata, cinque anni, e l’elevato numero di vittime (dai cinquanta ai centomila morti) la guerra civile del Tagikistan rimane, agli occhi del grande pubblico occidentale (e non solo), uno dei conflitti meno conosciuti del convulso periodo immediatamente successivo alla fine della Guerra Fredda, oscurato dai contemporanei ma ben più mediatici conflitti nella ex-Jugoslavia, in Algeria o in Somalia. La guerra civile tagica, nonostante l’oblio che ormai circonda questa drammatica pagina di storia, è di grande interesse sia per lo studio dei conflitti nati dal dissolvimento dell’Unione Sovietica che per eventuali comparazioni con conflitti attualmente in corso, come quello in Siria che oppone le forze governative alla ribellione islamista.

COMUNITÀ RELIGIOSE IN SIRIA di Vittoria Squillacioti

La Siria odierna è un paese complesso dal punto di vista etnico e religioso. Per comprendere quali siano effettivamente le differenze che caratterizzano la sua popolazione è necessario tenere presente le variabili della lingua, della confessione religiosa e dell’eventuale collocazione geografica delle diverse comunità, tre variabili che agiscono profondamente nella definizione delle diverse identità e appartenenze. Nel variegato mosaico siriano riscontriamo così la presenza dominante dei musulmani, ancorché suddivisi tra sunniti, sciiti, ismailiti, alawiti, drusi e yazidi, ma anche diverse varietà del cristianesimo ed una comunità ebraica.

ARABIA SAUDITA: ALLEANZE ESTERE E DINAMICHE INTERNE di Sara Brzuszkiewicz

In seguito al deciso rifiuto da parte dell’Arabia Saudita del seggio nel Consiglio di Sicurezza delle Nazioni Unite, per il quale era stata eletta come membro non permanente, ci si interroga sugli attuali rapporti del Regno dei Saud con storici alleati, rivali di sempre e timido dissenso interno, per scoprire che, nonostante a prima vista possa sembrare il contrario, il vento del cambiamento è ancora lontano dalla Culla dell’Islam.

IL TAGLIO DELL’ISTMO DI SUEZ di Lorenzo Salimbeni

Nel novembre del 1869 venne inaugurato il Canale di Suez. Ci era voluto quasi un decennio di massacranti lavori per portare a compimento quest’opera ciclopica, dopo che già in fase di progettazione non erano mancate le polemiche. La necessità di mettere in collegamento il Mar Mediterraneo ed il Mar Rosso era chiara a tutti, ma la modalità con cui conseguire tale obiettivo era oggetto di discussione. Vi fu chi propose di aprire un canale fra il Mar Rosso ed il delta del Nilo (come era già stato fatto all’epoca dei Faraoni e della dominazione araba dell’Egitto), chi insistette per un collegamento ferroviario Alessandria-Il Cairo-Mar Rosso e chi spinse per tagliare l’istmo di Suez, anche se si riteneva che fra i due mari vi fosse un dislivello di alcuni metri che avrebbe richiesto la costruzione di complesse chiuse. La Compagnia Universale del Canale di Suez presieduta dallo spregiudicato Ferdinand de Lesseps, il genio ingegneristico di Luigi Negrelli e l’iniziale opposizione britannica furono i soggetti più importanti nella fase iniziale dell’ambiziosa opera di scavo.

INTERVISTE

TUCCI IN ORIENTE. L’AVVENTURA DI UNA VITA. INTERVISTA A ENRICA GARZILLI (a cura di Andrea Fais)

Enrica Garzilli è, dal 1995, direttrice delle riviste accademiche “International Journal of Sanskrit Studies” e “Journal of South Asia Women Studies”. È stata quindi Research Affiliate al P.G.D.A.V. College, una delle più antiche istituzioni dell’Università di Delhi. Dal 1991 al 2011 ha vinto la Senior Fellowship presso il Center for the Study of World Religions dell’Università di Harvard (1992–94), ha compiuto quattro anni di studi post-laurea in storia, informatica e giurisprudenza, ha insegnato come Lecturer di sanscrito all’università di Harvard e servito come direttore editoriale della Harvard Oriental Series-Opera Minora, è stata Visiting Researcher alla Harvard Law School (1994–96) e docente presso le università di Macerata, Perugia e Torino. Collabora in qualità di esperta alla RSI – Radiotelevisione Svizzera e a riviste e giornali italiani.

“GLOBAL TIMES”: UNO STRUMENTO DI DIALOGO. INTERVISTA A LI HONGWEI (a cura di Andrea Fais)

Li Hongwei è caporedattore dell’edizione in lingua inglese del quotidiano di approfondimento cinese “Global Times”. Fondato nel 1993 dall’editore del “Quotidiano del Popolo”, il “Global Times” ha raggiunto una popolarità internazionale a partire dal 2009, quando fu lanciata l’edizione in lingua inglese che ha raggiunto i lettori di tutto il mondo, accreditandosi come riferimento imprescindibile per conoscere analisi e opinioni della società cinese. La presente intervista è stata rilasciata ad Andrea Fais, collaboratore di “Eurasia” e di “Global Times”.

RECENSIONI

Luciano Pignataro, La Cina contemporanea da Mao Zedong a Deng Xiaoping (1949-1980) (Andrea Fais)

Tiziano Terzani, Tutte le opere (Stefano Vernole)

Carlo Terracciano, L’Impero del Cuore del Mondo (Andrea Fais)

Massimo Cacciari, Il potere che freno (Claudio Mutti)

La geostrategia dell’India e la Cina

La geostrategia dell’India e la Cina

Mackinder contro Mahan?

Zorawar Daulet Singh

 

Ex: http://www.geopolitica-rivista.org

 

Due eventi recenti esemplificano il dilemma geopolitico dell’India. Durante i primi giorni di aprile 2013 è stato riferito che alcuni sottomarini cinesi avevano condotto incursioni nell’Oceano Indiano, ovviamente avvertite dai sonar della marina statunitense¹. Un paio di settimane dopo c’è stata l’intrusione di un plotone di truppe cinesi nella zona della valle di Depsang, nel Ladakh orientale². Anche se lo status precedente all’incursione è stato raggiunto pacificamente, l’incidente del Ladakh ricorda chiaramente le durevoli implicazioni dell’irrisolta controversia himalayana. Insieme, ciò a cui entrambi questi eventi fanno pensare è anche la profonda controversia nella geostrategia dell’India nei confronti della Cina. Questa è contesa tra le rappresentazioni di Mackinder e di Mahan, e parte della sua ambivalenza strategica può essere ricondotta proprio alla mancanza di una rappresentazione geopolitica ben definita su cui basare il dibattito.

L’illusione mahaniana

Una soluzione mahaniana alla sfida posta dalla Cina riguarda il fatto che l’India può superare alcuni dei suoi svantaggi continentali disturbando le linee di comunicazione marittime (SLOC – sea lines of communications) cinesi, o prendendo parte alle dispute dell’Asia Orientale. La logica di fondo deriva dal concetto di escalation orizzontale, secondo cui si può tentare di superare l’asimmetria in un teatro facendo salire il conflitto ad un dominio geografico più ampio. Riassumendo, se la Cina dovesse continuare ad avventurarsi nelle montagne, l’India potrebbe rispondere in mare aperto.

Anche se concettualmente intuitivo, questo collegamento richiede che Pechino valuti l’integrità delle sue linee di comunicazioni marittime in una maniera sufficiente a spingerla a modificare i suoi piani sulle montagne. I blocchi navali sono inoltre operazioni complesse, e l’orizzonte temporale necessario al successo, che corrisponderebbe al porre una seria minaccia alla sicurezza delle risorse cinesi, sarebbe significativamente più lungo di quello richiesto da una rapida e limitata operazione continentale volta a modificare permanentemente la linea di controllo effettiva (Line of Actual Control – LAC) o avente scopi punitivi. La crescente riserva strategica di petrolio della Cina inoltre, anche se destinata a compensare turbative di mercato, rappresenterebbe una risorsa in una situazione del genere. Infine, la ricerca cinese di nuove linee di comunicazione eurasiatiche, sia mediante i sempre più importanti legami energetici con la Russia che con le interconnessioni attraverso l’Asia Centrale, indicano una potenziale riduzione della dipendenza dalle linee di comunicazioni marittime dell’Oceano Indiano, almeno per alcune delle risorse strategiche³. Chiaramente la Cina percepirà il gioco allo stesso modo, e nulla suggerisce che la predilezione dello statega marittimo indiano per questo tipo di gioco rappresenti un’eccezione. In parole povere un interesse centrale non può essere difeso attraverso azioni orizzontali periferiche.

Affrontare la pressione continentale

Come può l’India impedire che venga esercitata una pressione pesante sulle sue frontiere? Non ci sono alternative alla deterrenza in ambito continentale, dove suoi interessi fondamentali, in questo caso l’integrità territoriale, possono essere minacciati. Forse il metodo più sistematico per sviluppare opzioni di deterrenza è con un doppio processo.

In primo luogo il rafforzamento dei sistemi di allerta delle frontiere nei passaggi chiave di tutta la linea di controllo effettiva, attraverso il potenziamento della logistica, le capacità di spostamento pesante, e le capacità di intelligence, sorveglianza e ricognizione (ISR), per migliorare l’abilità a muovere le forze in avanti verso passi montani vulnerabili. Questo aumenterebbe un po’ i costi per la Cina. A dire il vero esistono intrinseci limiti geografici a quanto la catena logistica può diventare flessibile ed efficiente, e l’India non riuscirà mai a pareggiare i vantaggi della Cina, che prevedono un approccio decisamente flessibile alla gestione delle frontiere, permesso dalla comodità dell’uniforme territorio tibetano. Ma l’India non si avvicina neanche lontanamente a un briciolo di quelle che sono la moderna logistica e la rete ISR in una topografia vincolata.

Un rapporto, basato su valutazioni ufficiali, afferma che “sul versante indiano molte delle strade si fermano tra i 60 e gli 80 km prima della LAC, compromettendo così il dispiegamento delle truppe e la loro presenza in avanti”⁴. Nonostante la decisione ufficiale di migliorare l’interconnessione delle regioni di confine in tutte e tre le sezioni della frontiera indo-cinese “a partire dal 2010, solo nove delle 72 strade pianificate sono state completate”⁵. Alcune delle motivazioni, legate principalmente all’inerzia burocratica e ai gravi limiti nel coordinamento e nelle capacità dell’Organizzazione delle strade di confine, sono note, ma non sono state affrontate⁶.

Si può affermare che la mancanza di una logistica moderna e di una rete di connessione può aver involontariamente enfatizzato in modo eccessivo il pattugliamento dei punti controversi lungo la LAC. In altre parole, l’approccio prevalente per la gestione delle frontiere è una soluzione tampone per compensare problemi strutturali decennali sul retro, come quelli infrastrutturali, della catena logistica, delle ISR basate sulla tecnologia, ecc. Se alcuni di questi aspetti, compresa la capacità di monitoraggio, fossero rafforzati, la gestione delle frontiere verrebbe trasformata. In assenza di seri mutamenti nella rete logistica retrostante che conduce alle montagne, l’India potrebbe restare per sempre ostaggio di una situazione in cui un’azione cinese in una zona controversa lungo la LAC lascia a Nuova Delhi solamente opzioni costose.

In secondo luogo, anziché in ambiti periferici, la capacità di aumentare i livelli della violenza orizzontalmente e verticalmente costituisce un elemento importante per il rafforzamento della deterrenza. La Cina è logisticamente in grado di ammassare un grande volume di forze e potenza di fuoco in ogni settore in breve tempo⁷. Per scoraggiare tale scenario da “guerra lampo”, l’India può dimostrare di avere le capacità e la disciplina per dirigere gli obiettivi a un grado più basso, nel cuore del Tibet e in un dominio cui la Cina assegna un importante valore, il suo heartland continentale nella parte orientale.
Questo implica che l’India ha bisogno di sistemi di deterrenza a distanza come missili a lunga gittata e una forza aerea avente un ampio raggio d’azione. Alcune di queste capacità esistono già, ma non sono state dirette verso obiettivi di deterrenza dalla politica centrale. Di conseguenza le forze armate, esercito e aviazione in questo caso, vengono lasciati a soddisfare le loro limitate preferenze, precludendo una dottrina congiunta terra-aria. L’esercito è legato a una concezione di deterrenza che prevede un uso intensivo delle risorse umane, mentre le forze aeree si accontentano di accumulare funzionalità ad hoc senza contribuire a una condizione di deterrenza stabile. È sconcertante, ad esempio, che l’India stia cercando di conquistare capacità di proiezione fuori area senza prima considerare le esigenze di trasporto dei carichi pesanti per le sue necessità di sicurezza o l’assenza di una rete di difesa aerea moderna.

Forse è stato a partire da una valutazione così frammentaria che un documento programmatico ampiamente letto nel 2012 parlava di promuovere la deterrenza asimmetrica, preparandosi “a innescare una vera e propria rivolta nelle zone occupate dalle forze cinesi” in caso d’invasione⁸! La Cina non è neanche lontanamente in procinto di impegnare i piani dello stratega indiano in una lunga guerra vicino alle colline. In effetti, si può affermare che un approccio di modernizzazione della difesa delle frontiere dominato dalle risorse umane, piuttosto che rafforzare la deterrenza, potrebbe involontariamente minarla, inviando a Pechino un messaggio sbagliato, e, allo stesso tempo, illudere la leadership politica e militare che stia per essere posto in essere un atteggiamento di “difesa attiva”⁹.

Sfide in tempo di pace e guerra limitata

La sfida cinese lungo le frontiere deve essere analizzata chiaramente in ogni sua parte. In assenza di un confine ben definito, una delle sfide consiste nel garantire che la zona contestata della LAC non si ampli a causa dell’abilità logistica della Cina nel perseguire un atteggiamento attivista di perlustrazione in tempo di pace. Questo può essere affrontato solo, come già accennato, concentrando l’attenzione sulla logistica e sulle capacità di monitoraggio, insieme a un approccio dinamico alla gestione delle frontiere. Inoltre, dato che l’India possiede un territorio più basso, deve anche fare leva sulle misure di confidence-building (CBM) e intanto negoziare nuove norme per vincolare le capacità superiori della Cina in termini di flessibilità e pattugliamento. Se sfruttate prudentemente, le CBM possono aiutare nel mantenimento di uno status quo stabile.

C’è poi il classico scenario di un conflitto limitato derivante da un deterioramento delle relazioni bilaterali. Questo conduce direttamente al cuore di una valida strategia di deterrenza basata sulla natura geopolitica del campo di battaglia himalayano. Una strategia di deterrenza fondata sulla negazione è un approccio sbagliato in un mondo nucleare. L’asimmetria può in effetti essere volta a favore dell’India. Anziché affidarsi a una strategia di risposta flessibile, che vede la Cina in una posizione migliore grazie alla sua logistica superiore e ai vantaggi geostrategici del suo territorio più alto, la dottrina indiana dovrebbe basarsi sulla deterrenza attraverso la punizione. È inutile e costoso prepararsi ad attaccare la Cina a tutti i livelli con ogni tipo di aggressione. Se c’è una lezione da imparare dalla coppia India-Pakistan è proprio questa. L’attore convenzionalmente più debole può annullare l’asimmetria sfruttando politicamente le sue capacità strategiche e la sua dottrina. Una dottrina nucleare credibile e ponderatamente segnalata, correlata a una dottrina convenzionale congiunta ad ampio raggio d’azione, consentirà all’India di allontanare lo scenario dell’avventurismo cinese.

Di chi è la dottrina?

Il punto cruciale è che l’appropriata dottrina militare sta emergendo a partire dall’inerzia istituzionale piuttosto che attraverso un piano accuratamente dibattuto. Se l’obiettivo è creare deterrenza in condizioni di alta tecnologia convenzionale e nucleare, allora investire nelle risorse umane per intraprendere un’ipotetica battaglia in Tibet è una strategia non ottimale che potrebbe esacerbare il dilemma della sicurezza tra India e Cina, senza aumentare la tranquillità dell’India sulla frontiera. Dati i vantaggi geostrategici e logistici della Cina, un atteggiamento di difesa attiva da parte dell’India è semplicemente non credibile.

Una strategia di deterrenza mediante punizione, combinata a solide capacità di mantenimento, è preferibile all’illusione di poter perseguire una dottrina di difesa attiva. Una strategia di questo tipo richiede sistemi di precisione a lungo raggio, la conoscenza del settore spaziale, capacità aeree di quarta e quinta generazione e una moderna rete di difesa aerea, oggi quasi interamente garantita dall’Indian Air Force (IAF). Anche in questo caso, alcuni degli ingredienti di base esistono già, sparsi all’interno delle forze armate, ma non sono stati orientati verso obiettivi dottrinali comuni.

Il cuore del problema non è la mancanza di pensiero strategico, ma la diversità delle percezioni strategiche e delle dottrine che sono in competizione per la validità individuale e il primato. Mentre i mahaniani sminuiscono i continentalisti per il loro attaccamento a rappresentazioni geopolitiche obsolete, questi ultimi si sono sforzati di interiorizzare le implicazioni di un ambiente ad alta tecnologia post nucleare, dove la deterrenza deve essere la finalità principale della strategia militare. La dimensione militare della grande strategia non può essere di tipo additivo, in cui le diverse parti interessate, in questo caso le forze armate, suggeriscono mezzi autonomi per affrontare le stesse minacce o addirittura ricostruiscono delle minacce per adattarsi ai mezzi, mentre il compito dello stratega è di far quadrare insieme queste dottrine!

La strategia non consiste nel gettare soldi in un pozzo senza fondo, ma nell’orientare in modo dinamico e creativo gli strumenti più appropriati verso le minacce in modo che possano apparire basati sugli obiettivi politici e sulla dottrina militare degli avversari, e non come e dove dovrebbero apparire. L’elite politica dell’India deve accettare di riconoscere la sua parte di responsabilità, dato che è stata l’apatia a quel livello a permettere un’impostazione dal basso e un approccio frammentario alla strategia, senza un pianificatore centrale disposto a fissare i termini dell’agenda.

La priorità dell’India: Cina continentale o Cina marittima?

L’India dovrebbe focalizzarsi più sulla Cina continentale che su quella marittima, ed è l’equilibrio di potere e d’influenza sulla periferia subcontinentale che richiede costante attenzione strategica. Le linee di comunicazione cinesi verso l’Asia Meridionale partono dalla Cina continentale. Il corridoio verso l’Asia Centrale, i collegamenti che attraversano il Karakorum tramite il Pakistan e il corridoio attraverso il Myanmar sono tutti parte della geostrategia continentale di Pechino per garantire la sicurezza delle sue regioni periferiche e integrarsi con i vicini. L’estensione e l’ulteriore potenziale di queste linee di comunicazione nel nord dell’Oceano Indiano, nel Golfo del Bengala o nel Mar Arabico, non possono essere sfruttati senza l’acquiescenza strategica e la cooperazione dell’India.

Il regno marittimo non è, contrariamente a quanto osservano alcuni analisti¹⁰, il teatro di un gioco a somma zero tra India e Cina, in cui sono in ballo gli interessi vitali di entrambi i Paesi. La realtà geopolitica è che le linee di comunicazioni marittime cinesi passano vicino a schieramenti navali indiani, e oltre l’85% delle importazioni di petrolio cinesi attraversano le rotte marittime dell’Oceano Indiano. Allo stesso modo, più del 50% del commercio indiano attraversa oggi gli stretti di Malacca e Singapore. Anziché rappresentare una fonte di conflitto questo dovrebbe essere la base di un rapporto marittimo accomodante.
Nell’ambito di un’economia politica internazionale interdipendente l’idea di sicurezza unilaterale lungo le linee di comunicazione marittima è illogica.

I territori dell’Indo-Pacifico sono caduti sotto il dominio di una sola superpotenza in condizioni storiche uniche che non possono prevalere a tempo indeterminato. Anche se è prematuro valutare a priori l’evoluzione del sistema marittimo dell’Indo-Pacifico, sicuramente questa vedrà uno sforzo collettivo in cui nessuna singola potenza può essere esclusa dalla gestione degli spazi comuni. All’interno di questa logica è probabile che diverse potenze regionali prendano in carico oneri maggiori nelle loro periferie geopolitiche. Ma finché il commercio interregionale e lo scambio di risorse sostengono l’economia globale, gli spazi comuni non possono diventare un sistema di sicurezza chiuso. La rivalità marittima anglo-tedesca testimonia l’inutilità di un gioco a somma zero. Quella rivalità ha prodotto un’incontrollabile corsa agli armamenti che ha frantumato il predominio marittimo britannico e, in ultima analisi, le pretese della Germania di avere un’egemonia europea.

In effetti, l’evoluzione della tecnologia militare evidenzia come le idee di Mahan siano pressoché obsolete. La storica logica mahaniana di controllo offensivo del mare attraverso le grandi flotte di superficie, “definita come la capacità di utilizzare i mari sfidando la volontà degli altri”¹¹, è superata. Le prescrizioni originali di Mahan sul controllo del mare derivavano da uno specifico contesto storico, industriale e tecnologico che non prevale più, vista l’evoluzione dell’ambiente tecnologico-militare. Forze missilistiche continentali a lungo raggio; capacità aerospaziali di quarta e quinta generazione; funzionalità subacquee come i sottomarini d’attacco; ISR e abilità nell’individuazione degli obiettivi su terra, aria e spazio; armi anti-satellite (ASAT) e capacità informatiche rendono l’idea del controllo del mare, un concetto altamente controverso. In realtà, la negazione del mare, insieme a limitate capacità di proiezione di potenza, è forse il massimo a cui le potenze emergenti contemporanee possono aspirare. È probabile che la struttura della forza marittima di domani assumerà la forma di piattaforme disaggregate e meno vulnerabili, piuttosto che di potenza di fuoco concentrata in grandi flotte trasportatrici di mezzi.

Sarebbe più appropriato descrivere la strategia militare cinese come un approccio regionale “antinavale” di negazione del mare che come una ricerca di potere marittimo globale¹². I sistemi terrestri sono parte integrante della modernizzazione navale della Cina, che non compete con le grandi flotte di superficie della tradizione anglo-americana. Come sottolinea una valutazione occidentale, “l’obiettivo principale della marina cinese è ancora quello di proteggere il Paese dal potere di attacco in mare statunitense”¹³. Un autorevole studio americano afferma che “la nuova marina della Cina conta più su viaggi senza equipaggio e missili balistici che su velivoli con equipaggio, e più su sottomarini che su navi di superficie”¹⁴. Ciò considerato, è ironico che, nel dibattito strategico indiano, qualcuno chiami in causa l’immagine mahaniana della Liaoning, la sola portaerei cinese, come simbolo e guida della strategia marittima cinese¹⁵. La proiezione in mare aperto, al di là dei mari regionali, è di secondaria importanza per Pechino. L’obiettivo principale della strategia cinese per l’immediato futuro è la negazione del mare, focalizzata nel Pacifico Occidentale e sulla marina statunitense.

La marina degli Stati Uniti riconosce di non poter più agire indisturbata nelle periferie marittime delle varie potenze regionali, e gran parte del suo dibattito strategico è animato dalla sfida asimmetrica antiaccesso che si estende nelle regioni dall’Asia Occidentale alla penisola coreana¹⁶. Queste tecnologie perturbatrici sono resistenti e, dal momento che vengono messe in campo dalle potenze del Rimland eurasiatico, il discorso mahaniano sarà profondamente modificato nei prossimi anni.
In sintesi, anche se Stati continentali come India e Cina possono far aumentare i costi operativi delle altre potenze marittime, incluse l’un l’altra, nelle loro rispettive regioni, non possono acquisire unilateralmente il controllo del mare necessario ad assicurare le linee di comunicazione marittima in mare aperto, linee vitali delle loro economie. In ciò consiste la logica della competizione e della cooperazione. Strategie di autotutela possono coesistere con regole cooperative di ripartizione degli oneri per consentire una più ampia stabilità degli spazi comuni.

Ammansire i mahaniani per sviluppare una geostrategia principalmente continentale

L’influenza cinese sulle coste dell’Oceano Indiano paradossalmente è emersa non perché la marina dell’Esercito popolare di liberazione fosse percepita come garante della sicurezza, ma perché l’assistenza economica e tecnico-militare ha assicurato alla Cina uno spazio politico. Le possibilità marittime dell’India si riducono a un insieme di mezzi per recuperare influenza. Per quanto riguarda l’influenza indiana in Asia Orientale, l’emulazione delle pratiche cinesi è una strada maggiormente percorribile rispetto all’eventualità di premature incursioni marittime in teatri dove l’India dovrebbe confrontarsi con il peso della potenza di fuoco cinese. Ad esempio, l’influenza indiana è avanzata di più sostenendo la capacità propria del Vietnam di bilanciare asimmetricamente una Cina assertiva, piuttosto che con la presenza diretta nel Mar Cinese Meridionale.

I mahaniani hanno raccomandato all’India di disfarsi delle sue rappresentazioni continentali e prospettano per essa il ruolo marittimo di “garante della sicurezza” in altre regioni. Quest’analisi fin qui suggerisce che non è una strategia prudente. Considerati gli straordinari investimenti e il tempo richiesto da una modernizzazione della marina, è indispensabile che gli strateghi indiani raggiungano questa consapevolezza.
I mahaniani per certi aspetti riflettono i più ampi cambiamenti nel profilo economico e diplomatico dell’India, che hanno diffuso i suoi interessi in tutto il mondo. È vero che l’India globalizzata ha un impatto economico e culturale in molti continenti, e che le sue istituzioni dovrebbero riflettere ciò, ma non è affatto detto che la strategia marittima, spesso considerata come il potenziale mezzo di espansione degli interessi globali indiani, dovrebbe guidare questo processo. E non è sicuramente detto che l’India debba ricercare un ruolo extra-regionale prima ancora di aver raggiunto un minimo di sicurezza e influenza nella propria regione, in cui le sue aspirazioni locali restano fortemente contestate.

Per il futuro imminente gli interessi fondamentali dell’India dovrebbero restare nel continente ed essere perseguiti attraverso una geostrategia principalmente continentale. Un ruolo marittimo strettamente legato al rafforzamento della deterrenza e dell’influenza nel Subcontinente sembra più in sintonia non solo con le sfide nazionali dell’India, ma anche con la direzione geostrategica delle pressioni che continuano a ricorrere.

(Traduzione dall’inglese di Chiara Macci)

NOTE:

Zorawar Daulet Singh è ricercatore presso il Center for Policy Alternatives, Nuova Delhi e dottorando presso l’India Institute, King’s College, Londra.

1. Singh, Rahul, China Submarines in Indian Ocean Worry Indian Navy, “Hindustan Times”, 7 April 2013.
2. Singh, Rahul, China Ends Ladakh Standoff, Troops Pull Back, “Hindustan Times”, 5 May 2013.
3. Downs, Erica S., Money Talks: China-Russia Energy Relations after Xi Jinping’s Visit to Moscow, 1 April 2013; Alexandros Petersen, China Latest Piece of the New Silk Road, “Eurasia Daily Monitor”, Vol. 10, No. 4, 10 January 2013; Li Yingqing e Guo Anfei, Third Land Link to Europe Envisioned, “China Daily”, 2 July 2009.
4. Rajagopalan, Rajeswari Pillai e Rahul Prakash, Sino-Indian Border Infrastructure: An Update, ORF Occasional Paper No. 42, May 2013, p. 11.
5. Ibid., p. 14.
6. Ibid. Si veda anche Shishir Gupta, 45 Years After China Conflict, Delhi to Build Roads Linking Ladakh Outposts, “Indian Express”, 21 May 2007.
7. Chansoria, Monika, China’s Infrastructure Development in Tibet: Evaluating Trendlines, Manekshaw Paper No. 32, New Delhi: Claws, 2011.
8. Khilnani, Sunil, Rajiv Kumar, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Prakash Menon, Nandan Nilekani, Srinath Raghavan, Shyam Saran e Siddharth Varadarajan, Nonalignment 2.0: A Foreign and Strategic Policy for India in the Twenty First Century, New Delhi: Centre for Policy Research, 2012, p. 41.
9. Samanta, Pranab Dhal, Incursion Effect: Strike Corps on China Border Gets Nod, “Indian Express”, 26 May 2013; Ajai Shukla, New Strike Corps for China Border, “Business Standard”, 24 August 2011.
10. Raja Mohan, C., Beijing at Sea, “Indian Express”, 26 April 2013.
11. Gompert, David C., Sea Power and American Interests in the Western Pacific, Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, 2013, p. 186.
12. Ibid., p. 14.
13. Ibid., p. 113.
14. Saunders, Phillip, Christopher Yung, Michael Swaine, e Andrew Nien-Dzu Yang (eds), The Chinese Navy: Expanding Capabilities, Evolving Roles, Washington, D.C.: National Defence University Press, 2011, p. 12.
15. Raja Mohan, Beijing at Sea, n. 10.
16. Gertz, Bill, Threat in Asia is Anti-ship Missiles, “Washington Times”, 23 March 2010; Roger Cliff, Mark Burles, Michael S. Chase, Derek Eaton, Kevin L. Pollpeter, Entering the Chinese Antiaccess Strategies and Their Implications for the United States Dragon’s Lair, Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, 2007.